SCOTLAND

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his Department provides subsidised gym facilities for its staff.

Ann McKechin: The Scotland Office does not have any gym facilities.

WALES

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether his Department provides subsidised gym facilities for its staff.

Peter Hain: No.

Departmental Written Questions

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what methodology his Department used to determine whether answers to questions in the formulation "if he will set out with statistical information related as directly as possible to the tabling hon. Member's constituency the effects on that constituency of his Department's policies since 1997" could be provided without incurring disproportionate cost; and if he will make a statement.

Peter Hain: When deciding whether a response to a parliamentary question is likely to incur disproportionate cost my staff consult the relevant Cabinet Office guidance, paragraphs 7.26 - 7.31.

Rape Complaints Review

Hywel Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had with his ministerial colleagues on matters on which there will be co-operation between his Department and the Welsh Assembly Government in implementing the recommendations of the Stern Review of Rape Reporting in England and Wales.

Peter Hain: It is important to make clear that Baroness Stern's Review of Rape Reporting recognises that there has been real progress made to tackle sexual violence in our society. However, it also recognises that more still needs to be done and the UK Government are carefully considering the report and its twenty three recommendations to determine the best way forward. We will be establishing an action plan to address the issues raised by Baroness Stern and will be discussing this plan with all stakeholders, including the Welsh Assembly Government.
	I, and my office, remain committed to ensuring that all parties continue to co-operate and build upon the good foundations that have already been laid; and that we continue to support victims, challenge attitudes and further improve the response of the criminal justice system and health service.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Departmental Written Questions

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what methodology his Department used to determine whether answers to questions in the formulation "if he will set out with statistical information related as directly as possible to the tabling hon. Members' constituency the effects on that constituency of his Department's policies since 1997" could be provided without incurring disproportionate cost; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Goggins: The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) seeks to answer all parliamentary questions that do not incur disproportionate cost. Disproportionate cost is determined via a disproportionate cost threshold (DCT). The current DCT is £800, announced in Parliament by the Treasury on 20 January 2010,  Official Report, column 15WS.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission: Pay

Sammy Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much was paid in bonuses to staff of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission in each for the last five years.

Paul Goggins: The amount paid in bonuses to staff of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission in each for the last five years was as follows:
	
		
			   £ 
			 2005-06 0 
			 2006-07 0 
			 2007-08 5,421 
			 2008-09 3,056 
			 2009-10 7,306

DEFENCE

Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date his Department's Animal Welfare Advisory Committee last met.

Kevan Jones: The Animal Welfare Advisory Committee last met on 20 March 2007. The work of the Committee duplicates the work of the Home Office in regulating animal welfare, which the MOD fully complies with.

Armed Forces: Eyesight

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  if he will make it his policy that applicants to the armed forces will not be rejected on the grounds that they have previously undergone laser eye surgery; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  whether members of the armed forces who have had laser eye surgery to achieve the required level of sight attainment are allowed to continue in service.

Kevan Jones: The following methods of surgical correction of myopia or hypermetropia are considered suitable for entry on an individual, case by case basis for non-specialist employment groups and subject to single service requirements:
	Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK)
	Laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK)
	Laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK)
	Intrastromal corneal rings (ICRs), otherwise known as intrastromal corneal segments (ICSs)
	Recruits must fulfil certain criteria, including that at least 12 months have elapsed since the last procedure, that there are no significant visual side effects, and that refraction has stabilised.
	Entry will not be considered for radial keratotomy (RK), or astigmatic keratotomy (AK), or any other form of incisional refractive surgery, other than those procedures listed above. All invasive intraocular surgical procedures remain a bar to entry.
	The methods of surgical correction of myopia listed above for recruits may be considered suitable for serving personnel on an individual, case by case basis.
	However, potential complications of the procedure may result in them being re-graded at a lower level of fitness, and significant deterioration in vision may require them to be re-graded as undeployable.
	Exceptions to the above general policy apply in the case of some specialist employment groups, most notably aircrew. Aircrew are normally recruited before ocular maturity and at an age when Corneal Refractive Surgery (CRS) may not provide long-term refractive stability. Furthermore, the long-term outcome of CRS in trained aircrew needs to be evaluated before considering the procedure for potential aircrew. Therefore, candidates for recruitment to the armed forces as aircrew who have had CRS are rejected. There are no current plans to change this policy.
	Serving aircrew in all three services are permitted to undertake certain forms of CRS currently including PRK or LASEK corrective surgery, with the consent and support of medical officers.

Armed Forces: Health Services

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the Armed Forces' Pay Review Body: Service Medical and Dental Officers: Supplement to the 38th Report 2009, what the shortfall was in regular service  (a) medical officers and  (b) orthopaedic and trauma surgeon officers for the (i) Royal Navy, (ii) Royal Air Force and (iii) Army, on the latest date for which figures are available.

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many trained orthopaedic surgeon  (a) regulars and  (b) reservists are (i) employed and (ii) required in each armed service.

Kevan Jones: Detailed data will no longer be published where this would highlight potential pinch points within the armed forces, including the Defence Medical Services. I am withholding the information requested as its disclosure would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.
	In order to maintain appropriate external scrutiny of such data, the Department will continue to provide comprehensive manning data to the House of Commons Defence Committee on a confidential basis.

Armed Forces: Housing

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  how many complaints were received by Modern Housing Solutions on the maintenance of service accommodation in Windsor in each of the last 12 months;
	(2)  what defects there are in service family accommodation at  (a) Calvary Crescent,  (b) Broom Farm Estate and  (c) Gratton Drive in Windsor; and what the (i) timetable and (ii) budget is for repairs to each;
	(3)  how often Modern Housing Solutions carries out customer satisfaction surveys; and when Modern Housing Solutions last conducted customer satisfaction surveys in Windsor;
	(4)  what assessment he has made of the effects of Modern Housing Solutions on the level of maintenance of service family accommodation.

Kevan Jones: The Housing Prime Contract (HPC), which covers the maintenance and repair of some 45,000 Service Family Accommodation (SFA) properties in England and Wales, has been delivered by Modern Housing Solutions (MHS) since 2006.
	MHS provides a comprehensive service and continues to show a sustained level of performance against contractual targets. Over the last 12 months the following percentage of emergency, urgent and routine repairs were completed within the agreed contractual timescales.
	
		
			  Repair type  Agreed timescale  Percentage completed in timescale 
			 Emergency Attend within three hours 99 
			 Urgent Attend within five working days 85 
			 Routine Attend within 20 working days 91 
		
	
	The HPC streamlines the number of contracts and the supply chain, provides consistent processes and standards, allows for a single set of management data to assess performance, and the introduction of a 24-hour 365-day free phone helpdesk to provide a single point of contact for occupants.
	MHS regularly surveys occupants by phone, via its website and through the completion of written questionnaires. Over the last 12 months, some 94 per cent. of occupants surveyed were satisfied with the service provided by the helpdesk and over 90 per cent. with the repair and maintenance service.
	A breakdown by location of the number of complaints received, the level of customer satisfaction, the time taken to complete repair jobs and the budget or actual cost in each case cannot be readily identified from the overall data.
	A list of all defects reported for SFA at the requested locations in Windsor is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Armed Forces: Housing

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the  (a) longest,  (b) shortest and  (c) average time taken was to make repairs to forces accommodation in Windsor after a call out in the most recent period for which figures are available.

Kevan Jones: Information relating to the longest, shortest and average time period taken to make repairs to accommodation in Windsor can be ascertained but will take more time to collate and verify. I will write to the hon. Member.

Armed Forces: Housing

John Howell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  how many complaints have been received by Modern Housing Solutions in respect of its work at RAF Benson in each of the last 24 months;
	(2)  what performance indicators have been set for Modern Housing Solutions in respect of its work on defence properties; and what assessment his Department has made of its performance against these targets in the last 12 months;
	(3)  what assessment has been made of the performance of Modern Housing Solutions in relation to its work at RAF Benson in the last 12 months.

Kevan Jones: Modern Housing Solutions (MHS) undertake a wide variety of repair and maintenance work on behalf of the Ministry of Defence (MOD). Key performance indicators relate to agreed contractual timescales for repairs. MHS are required to attend all emergency repairs within three hours and to make safe within 24 hours, to attend all urgent repairs within five working days and all routine repairs within 20 working days.
	MHS regularly publish details of their performance against these and other targets on their website under 'Progress Info for Occupants':
	www.modernhousingsolutions.com
	In addition, MOD staff in Defence Estate, MHS and Station representatives meet at RAF Benson on a regular basis to review overall performance and any issues or areas, concerns or problems with specific locations would be discussed at that time.
	While MHS record all complaints received, a breakdown by location cannot be readily identified from the overall data.

Armed Forces: Pensions

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the applicability of the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 1975 to widows who remarry and are subsequently divorced  (a) under Scottish law and  (b) in the rest of the UK.

Kevan Jones: The applicability of the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 1975 to widows who remarry, and are subsequently divorced does not differentiate between Scottish law and the rest of the United Kingdom.
	In order for an earlier pension, which has ceased due to remarriage, to restart the separation must be recognised in legal terms as divorced, dissolved or widowed and those administering the scheme with the authority of the Defence Council must be satisfied that the pension should become payable to the beneficiary for reasons of hardship.

Armed Forces: Rail Travel

Denis MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his policy is on the class of fare to be used by officers of the rank of general and equivalent on rail journeys.

Kevan Jones: Officers who hold the paid rank of OF3 (Lieutenant Commander, Major or Squadron Leader) and above, when travelling on duty, are entitled to travel first class.
	However, restrictions are currently in place and regardless of entitlement, rail travel should be standard class, not first class. The exception, to be authorised by line managers, is if by booking ahead a first class fare can be obtained for less than the flexible standard fare.

Armed Forces: USA

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what international agreements govern weaponry held by US Visiting Forces at bases in the UK.

Bill Rammell: The storage of US munitions on bases made available to the US Visiting Force is governed by a UK/US Memorandum of Agreement dated October 1997, entitled "The Import, Export, Transportation, Safety, Security, Storage and Disposal of US Explosives and Weapons in the UK and the Approval, Use and Safety of Ground Ranges".

Cluster Munitions

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Morley and Rothwell of 23 February 2009,  Official Report, column 25W, on cluster munitions, whether agreement has yet been reached with US Visiting Forces on removal of cluster munitions stored at US bases in the UK.

Bill Rammell: Since the UK adopted the convention on cluster munitions in May 2008 there have been ongoing discussions with the US with regard to their cluster munition stockpiles and necessity of having stockpiles on UK territory. The US has identified the cluster munitions on UK territory as exceeding their worldwide operational planning requirements. Baroness Kinnock during the Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill Second Reading in the House of Lords on 8 December 2009,  Official Report, column 1020, announced that these cluster munitions will be removed from sites in the UK in 2010 and from all UK territories by 2013.

Cluster Munitions

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what US cluster munitions are stored at US bases in the UK.

Bill Rammell: The United States stores various weapons in the UK. The US inventory of weapons is declared annually to the Ministry of Defence who ensure that all weapons are appropriately licensed and stored. It would be inappropriate to disclose the numbers, types and locations of such weapons. Therefore, I am withholding the detailed information as its disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and another state.
	However, I can confirm that the US has identified their cluster munitions on UK territory as exceeding their worldwide operational planning requirements. Therefore, these cluster munitions will be removed from sites in the UK in 2010 and from all UK territories by 2013, as declared by Baroness Kinnock during the Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill Second Reading in the House of Lords on 8 December 2009,  Official Report, column 1020.

Cluster Munitions

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence by what date all US cluster munitions will have been removed from the UK.

Bill Rammell: The US has identified the cluster munitions on UK territory as exceeding their worldwide operational planning requirements. Baroness Kinnock during the Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill Second Reading in the House of Lords on 8 December 2009,  Official Report, column 1020, announced that these cluster munitions will be removed from sites in the UK in 2010 and from all UK territories by 2013.

Cluster Munitions

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of UK cluster munitions in service on 30 May 2008 have been destroyed.

Bill Rammell: The only UK cluster munitions in service on 30 May 2008 were the Extended Range Bomblet Shell (ERBS) L20A1 M85 and the CRV-7 Multi-Purpose Sub Munition (MPSM). All other UK cluster munitions were withdrawn from service prior to this date.
	Destruction of the CRV-7 MPSMs was completed in July 2009. We are in the process of competing the contract for the disposal of the ERBS L20A1 M85s and these are therefore awaiting destruction.

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many smoking shelters have been built for his Department's staff in the last five years; and at what cost.

Kevan Jones: The requested information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department spent on interior design in relation to office refurbishments undertaken in each of the last five years.

Kevan Jones: This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Freedom of Information

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many requests for information as defined by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 were received by his Department in 2009; and how many of those requests  (a) received a full response within 40 working days and  (b) remain outstanding.

Kevan Jones: Statistics on requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 are published by the Ministry of Justice. Statistics for the quarter 1 October to 31 December 2009, and annual statistics for 2009, will be published by the Ministry of Justice on 29 April 2010. Releasing these statistics before this date would contravene the provisions of the Pre-release Access to Official Statistics Order which came into effect on 1 December 2008.
	Statistics for the first three quarters of 2009 have been published by the Ministry of Justice, and relevant extracts are shown in the table. Information is collected on the number of requests which receive a response within the statutory response time of 20 working days, those which receive a response within permitted extensions to this period ("in time"), and those which have not been answered at the time of reporting to the Ministry of Justice. Information on the number of responses sent within 40 working days is not collected and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			  2009 
			  Period  Requests received  Full response sent within 20 working days  Full response sent " in time "  Response outstanding at time of reporting 
			 January to March 758 477 27 133 
			 April to June 670 428 31 137 
			 July to September 766 307 70 306

Departmental Press Releases

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many press releases his Department has issued in the last 12 months.

Kevan Jones: The central MOD Media and Communications unit records press releases by calendar year and in 2009 issued 296 press releases.
	Records of press releases issued from other areas of the Department are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Written Questions

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what methodology his Department used to determine whether answers to questions in the formulation if he will set out with statistical information related as directly as possible to the tabling hon. Member's constituency the effects on that constituency of his Department's policies since 1997 could be provided without incurring disproportionate cost; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: The disproportionate cost threshold, which is the advisory cost limit at which Departments can refuse to answer a written PQ, is £800. It is calculated by reference to the cost to the Department of those involved in answering the question, specifically the personnel costs calculated on hourly rates. Answering questions of this formulation did not exceed this level.

Ex-servicemen: Prisoners

Neil Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what methodology his Department used to estimate the number of veterans in prison in England and Wales; whether  (a) reservists,  (b) people serving before 1979,  (c) people whose date of birth was unavailable,  (d) persons whose first name was unavailable,  (e) under 18 year olds,  (f) females who had changed their name following marriage and  (g) persons with aliases were included in his Department's estimate; and what the prison population was on the date on which the data on veterans in the prison system were extracted.

Kevan Jones: I refer the hon. Member to the answers given by the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle) on 2 March 2010,  Official Report, columns 1067-68W.

Group 4 Securicor

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 22 March 2010,  Official Report, column 13W, on Group 4 Securicor, what discussions his Department's officials have had with Group 4 Securicor on outsourcing services referred to in the unprinted paper reported to the House by the Defence Committee on 10 February 2010; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave him on 22 March 2010,  Official Report, column 14W.

Gurkhas: Immigration

Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  which Gurkha veterans' charities his Department has met to discuss implementation of the Government's policy on the settlement of ex-Gurkhas;
	(2)  which Gurkha charities have received funding from his Department following the decision to grant ex-Gurkhas UK settlement rights; and how much such funding each of those charities has received.

Kevan Jones: The Ministry of Defence has met with a number of service charities to discuss the mechanisms put in place to support those Gurkha veterans and their dependants who decide to come to settle in the UK under the new immigration rules. These meetings included the Gurkha Welfare Trust, which is the only charity established specifically for the relief of poverty and distress among Gurkha ex-servicemen of the British Crown and their dependants in Nepal. The Ministry of Defence has provided an annual grant to the Gurkha Welfare Trust since it was established in 1969. This grant, which currently amounts to just over £1 million per year, contributes towards the administrative costs of the trust's field arm operating in Nepal, the Gurkha Welfare Scheme.

RAF Coningsby

Robert Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reasons the provision of the fast jet test and evaluation advice was transferred from Boscombe Down Airfield to RAF Coningsby.

Bill Rammell: The transfer of most fast jet test flying and some evaluation activities, including 11 military and three QinetiQ posts, from Boscombe Down to RAF Coningsby is expected to result in a range of time, cost and performance benefits across Defence, including the more efficient use of flying hours, and an enhanced ability to meet the requirements of the front-line user, through the integration of developmental and operational test and evaluation activity.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Departmental Translation Services

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent on translation services by her Department in  (a) Ribble Valley,  (b) Lancashire and  (c) the UK in each of the last five years.

Jonathan R Shaw: The DWP provides a range of language translation services for customers across Great Britain (as Northern Ireland is excluded), namely:
	1. Face to face.
	2. Telephone.
	3. Translating by a range of services which includes the translation of departmental information leaflets and other documents that are provided to customers in a range of ethnic languages, audio and Braille, as well as all publications for Welsh-speaking customers living in Wales.
	4. We are also able to offer an ad-hoc service to convert documents into Easy Read format. Spend for Easy Read has in the past been included within other category spend and so cannot be identified without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The contractual arrangements for the services have been developed over a number of years and as a result spend has not been applicable for some of these services in each of the last five years or data have not been able to be gathered for spend during some years. Disproportionate cost would be incurred in trying to identify such spend.
	We are unable to identify spend for specific geographic areas, such as the Ribble Valley and Lancashire, without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The total spend information is given in the following table:
	
		
			  £ 
			  Type of translation service  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 Face to face and telephone 2,967,756 3,443,334 4,496,008 3,515,722 3,761,765 
			 Ethnic document translation n/a 120,720 267,500 134,945 (1)459,554 
			 Welsh 30,855 20,766 50,759 65,789 66,755 
			 Braille n/a n/a n/a 45,309 59,522 
			 Audio n/a n/a n/a 35,572 33,397 
			 Easy Read n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Total 2,998,611 3,584,820 4,814,267 3,797,337 4,380,993 
			 n/a = not available without incurring disproportionate cost as data not held centrally or is combined within other category data and not possible to separate.  (1) This figure includes all translation spend for the International Pensions Centre (IPC) which previously was not held centrally-total £381,370.59 for 2008-09.

Foreign Workers: EU Countries

Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what mechanisms are in place to ensure the compliance with health and safety requirements of workers from EU member states working in the UK.

Jonathan R Shaw: Under UK health and safety legislation, employers must provide a safe and healthy working environment for all workers under their control, including those from EU member states. Any workers from EU member states working as self-employed will also be subject to these requirements. Workers must take reasonable care for their own and others' health and safety at work, and cooperate with their employer to enable compliance. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and local authorities are responsible for enforcing the requirements in the majority of UK workplaces, and use inspection, investigation, enforcement, advice and guidance to secure compliance.

Pensioners: Social Security Benefits

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to the answer of 20 July 2009,  Official Report, columns 853-56W, on pensioners: social security benefits, what the average monetary value of benefits in kind provided to  (a) single pensioners and  (b) pensioner couples in York in respect of (i) NHS services, (ii) social services, (iii) travel concessions, (iv) television licences, (v) insulation and home repairs and improvement grants and (vi) other services has been for periods later than those given in that answer for which information is available.

Angela Eagle: A wide range of services and benefits in kind are available to older people and these are administered both centrally and locally. As a result, the information is not available in the format requested: some information is not collected and some could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The information which is available is given as follows.
	 (i) NHS services
	People aged 60 and over are able to claim free prescriptions and eye tests on the grounds of age. Detailed information on prescription charges is not held in the format requested.
	In financial year 2008-09, 90,380 free NHS sight tests were given to people aged 60 and over within the North Yorkshire and York PCT area, costing an estimated £1,789,524.
	There is no automatic entitlement for adult pensioners to NHS optical vouchers or free dental treatment. Individuals may qualify for these benefits if they are in receipt of certain qualifying benefits, or if they have been assessed as eligible for assistance under the NHS Low Income Scheme. Information on the value of such NHS services provided to patients of pensionable age who qualify on the basis of their personal economic circumstances is not available centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	 (ii) Social services
	The gross current expenditure by York council on social services for people aged 65 or over for the financial year 2008-09 was £30.8 million(1).
	 (iii) Travel concessions
	The statutory minimum travel concession, introduced in April 2008, gives those aged 60 or over and eligible disabled people free off-peak local bus travel in any part of England. The Government provide around £1 billion a year to fund the concession.
	Travel concession schemes are provided through local authorities, which have flexibility to enhance their schemes to offer more than the statutory minimum, so there are local variations in what is offered and take-up of concessionary travel also varies from one area to another. Therefore it is not possible to quantify the value of the benefit in kind in a specific local authority area.
	 (iv) Television licences
	Free television licences for people aged 75 or over were introduced in November 2000. TV Licensing, who administer free licences as agents for the BBC, are not able to provide geographical breakdowns of licences issued. However, figures are available for the number of households with at least one person aged 75 or over receiving winter fuel payments in York local authority. These people would be eligible for a free television licence. 12,180 households received winter fuel payments in York local authority in the year 2008-09.
	The television licence fee for the year 2009-10 is £142.50 for a colour television licence, and £48.00 for a black and white television licence.
	 (v) Insulation
	The Warm Front Scheme is the Government's main programme for tackling fuel poverty in vulnerable households in the private sector in England. Warm Front provides grants for heating, insulation and energy efficiency measures. For the year 2009-10, 132 single pensioner households and 100 two-pensioner households received Warm Front assistance in the York local authority area, and the average spend on each of those households was £1,870.08 and £1,675.20 respectively.
	(1)( ) Source:
	RO3 and PSS EX1 returns.
	 Note:
	Gross expenditure includes income from client contributions, but excludes capital charges and certain income items which count as expenditure elsewhere in the public sector, such as contributions from primary care trusts. This is to avoid double counting within the aggregate public sector accounts of the money involved.

Social Security Benefits: Fraud

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what her latest estimate is of the monetary value of benefits paid fraudulently to prisoners in each of the last five years.

Helen Goodman: Fraud can occur when a person is sent to prison and they do not notify the Department. If this is the case there can be a short delay before benefit payments are stopped.
	The Department matches its data with that held by the Ministry of Justice to identify prisoners who may still be in receipt of benefit. This data match now takes place weekly instead of four-weekly and we are detecting prisoner fraud more quickly than ever before, thus reducing the size of any overpayments.
	Over the last five years this type of fraud has only arisen in income support. Fraudulent overpayments to prisoners have remained consistently low accounting for no more than an estimated 0.1 per cent of income support benefit expenditure.
	The available information is in the table.
	
		
			  Estimated overpayments due to fraud by prisoners in each of the last five years 
			   Amount of income support overpaid( 1)  (£ million) 
			 2004-05(2) 6 
			   
			 2005-06 4 
			 2006-07 7 
			 2007-08 4 
			 2008-09 6 
			 (1) Estimates of customer fraud committed by prisoners are collated and published only for income support, jobseeker's allowance and pension credit. The levels for jobseeker's allowance and pension credit were £0 million in each of the last five years.  (2) Improvements to the methodology were introduced in 2005-06 which created a discontinuity between the estimates up to 2004-05 and from 2005-06 onwards. Therefore comparisons over time should be made with caution.   Source:  Published National Statistics Reports-Fraud and Error in the Benefit System.

WOMEN AND EQUALITY

Departmental Lost Property

John Mason: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality what property has been recorded as  (a) lost and  (b) stolen from the Government Equalities Office in the last 12 months; and what estimate has been made of the cost of the replacement of that property.

Michael Jabez Foster: Over the past 12 months the Government Equalities Office has recorded two items as missing. The first item was a laptop with an estimated value of £2,000. The laptop cannot be used without a security key, which was not lost. The second item was a set of blank travel tickets with a nominal value of £4,000, which in practice could not have been used by others.
	The Government Equalities Office has not recorded any items as stolen.

Departmental Surveys

Dominic Grieve: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality if she will place in the Library a copy of the benchmark results of the Civil Service People Survey for the Government Equalities Office.

Michael Jabez Foster: The Government Equalities Office (GEO) will be publishing its staff survey results as soon as practicable. Given the Department's small size, we need to give full and careful consideration to ensure in publishing results that individuals cannot be identified. Once the results are published on the GEO website, we will ensure a copy is placed in the Library.

Equality Bill

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality what representations she has received on the ways in which the provisions of the Equality Bill affect the rights of the individual in respect of freedom of religion.

Michael Jabez Foster: My officials, colleagues and I have received a number of representations on a range of issues from both individuals and religion and belief organisations since the introduction of the Equality Bill in April last year.
	The main issues raised were:
	whether the Bill curbed religious freedom of expression;
	restriction of freedom of conscience;
	a perceived hierarchy of rights where some protected characteristics take precedence over the rights of the religious;
	Catholic adoption agencies;
	the occupational requirement employment exception for organised religion; and
	faith-based care homes.
	Such discussions and representations are ongoing as it is always important for Government to maintain a dialogue.

International Women's Day

Anne Main: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality what plans the Government have to mark International Women's Day.

Maria Eagle: The Government are marking International Women's Day in a number of ways:
	a breakfast meeting at No. 10 with women executives on 8 March;
	a Commonwealth Parliamentary Seminar Reception (10 March); and
	a Parliamentary topical debate marking International Women's day in the House of Commons on11 March; and
	a reception for International Women's Day at No. 10 hosted by Sarah Brown on 18 March.
	In addition, individual Departments undertook the following to coincide with International Women's Day:
	 The Government Equalities Office published:
	'What the Government has done for women' factsheet;
	'Women's Representation' factsheet:
	Research report and findings on public attitudes to the representation of women in business and Government;
	Government's Response to the Speaker's Conference; and
	Report on the regional 'Women in Focus' events which promoted best practice in diverting women from crime (with Ministry of Justice).
	 The Foreign and Commonwealth Office:
	Welcomed the appointment of Minister of State, Baroness Kinnock, as Women's Officer. Baroness Kinnock will be responsible for leading the Government's work to tackle violence against women overseas. These are in addition to her responsibilities as Minister of State.
	Published a newly developed poster and leaflet designed to raise awareness of FGM. A new e-mail address has also been set up (fgm@fco.gov.uk) for those who have concerns or questions about FGM to use.
	 The Department for Schools, Children and Families :
	Published the report of the Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) Advisory Group and the Government's response, including plans to revise training for new teachers and to include VAWG issues in the PHSE curriculum for 2011.
	 The Home Office:
	Announced that a series of laws to protect vulnerable women by reducing the demand for prostitution, including the police no longer having to show kerb-crawlers are "persistent" before arresting them, will come into effect on 1 April.
	Held an internal ministerial event on delivering the Gender Equality duty with stakeholders.
	 The Department for International Development (DFID):
	Welcomed Andrea Cornwall, Director of the Pathways of Women's Empowerment Research Programme, to DFID to share key research findings. Pathways is an international research and communications programme that links academics, activists and practitioners across the globe to explore ways to enhance women's empowerment.
	Screened video clips giving ground level insights and testimonials from women in Ghana and posted these on the DFID website.
	Ellen Wratten, Director of Policy and Head of Profession for Social Development at DFID, will be giving a presentation at Plan International's celebration in Westminster Hall on 8 March on the new joint DFID/NIKE Foundation 'Girl Hub' programme that focuses on empowering adolescent girls in developing countries.

PRIME MINISTER

Charlie Whelan

Norman Baker: To ask the Prime Minister on what date Charlie Whelan first attended his morning meetings at Downing street; and how many such meetings he has attended since that date.

Gordon Brown: I have meetings with a wide range of organisations and individuals on a range of subjects.

Intelligence and Security Committee

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to the contribution of the Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee of 18 March 2010,  Official Report, column 997, on Intelligence and Security Committee, if he will hold discussions with the Chairman on whether the Committee's staff have had their own careers put in jeopardy; and if he will make a statement.

Gordon Brown: I have met and corresponded with the ISC and its Chairman on several occasions over the past year to discuss a range of matters of mutual interest, and will continue to do so.

HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION

Nurseries

Christopher Chope: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission 
	(1)  when the application for planning permission for change of use in connection with the proposed creation of a day nursery at 1 Parliament Street was submitted; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the application;
	(2)  when the application for listed building consent in connection with the proposed creation of a day nursery at 1 Parliament street was submitted; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the application.

Nick Harvey: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave on 23 March 2010,  Official Report, column 170W.

Nurseries

Christopher Chope: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what estimate the House of Commons Commission has made of the extent to which charges for places in the proposed day nursery at 1 Parliament street will meet the costs of its provision; and what the weekly subsidy per place is for which the Commission has budgeted in 2010-11.

Nick Harvey: The commercial competition for a nursery operator is currently in progress which will provide information relevant to the operating costs for the nursery. In order to avoid undermining the House's position in the commercial competition, it is not possible to disclose any further information at this stage. According to childcare experts, there is likely to be a build up of usage over a period: the average use of the first 12 months of a new nursery is likely to be around 40 per cent. The intention in the longer term is to recover the full operating costs through the charges made to users.

Nurseries

Christopher Chope: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what the closing date is for the receipt of tenders from day nursery operators for the contract to run a day nursery at 1 Parliament Street; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the specification for the contract.

Nick Harvey: The deadline for the receipt of tenders from nursery operators was Friday 19 March 2010. A copy of the specification for the contract will be placed in the Library.

OLYMPICS

Olympic Games 2012: Construction

Charlotte Atkins: To ask the Minister for the Olympics how much freight is planned to be transferred by water to the main Olympic site in each of the next 12 months.

Tessa Jowell: The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) is committed to transporting 50 per cent. of materials to the Park, by weight, using sustainable methods, i.e. rail or water. The ODA is currently exceeding this target with almost 64 per cent. of material transported to the Park by sustainable methods.
	The ODA will continue to actively encourage its supply chain to utilise rail and water facilities. While it is not within the ODA's remit to stipulate how many deliveries should be made to the Olympic Park by its supply chain, it is expected that there will be at least three barge movements per week as fit out work on the venues increases.

Olympic Games 2012: Construction

Charlotte Atkins: To ask the Minister for the Olympics what plans she has for development of the wharf at the main Olympic site.

Tessa Jowell: The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) constructed a temporary wharf on Waterworks river for the construction phase of the programme to provide contractors with the opportunity to move material into and out of the Park by water. It is currently intended that this temporary wharf will be decommissioned in the spring of 2011. However, the ODA is currently exploring potential usages for sections of the Wharf during the games and this work is ongoing.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Colombia: Human Rights

Jo Swinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received on the number of bodies in the mass grave recently discovered in La Macarena, Colombia.

Chris Bryant: The mass graves in La Macarena were first brought to the attention of our embassy in Bogota in November 2009.
	Our ambassador asked the Colombian Government, namely Carlos Franco, Director of the Presidential Human Rights Programme in Colombia, for information on the alleged mass graves. We received a reply on 16 February 2010, which I shared with Carolina Hoyos, a human rights activist whom I met on 16 March. According to Mr. Franco there are 650 corpses properly identified in their graves buried during the last 20 years. There are approximately 350 corpses not identified during the same 20 years. The burial of non-identified people at La Macarena's cemetery has been properly registered in the control books kept by the municipal authorities and the officers in charge of the cemetery's administration. We will continue to monitor developments in the investigation into these mass graves.
	I was dismayed to learn of the killing of Mr. Hurtado in the La Macarena region, who was President of the Human Rights committee of La Catalina. Our ambassador in Bogota raised Mr. Hurtado's assassination with the Director of the Presidential Human Rights Programme and the Head of the International Relations Unit at the Colombian Prosecutor's Office.

Conflict Resolution

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what Government funding is available for assistance to coexistence projects in other countries.

Ivan Lewis: For the current financial year (2009-10) the UK has provided over £100,000 of financial support to promote coexistence projects in Israel. The Government will look to fund several projects which will promote human rights in Israel in the next financial year. We cannot, as yet, confirm how much will be allocated to coexistence projects next financial year.

Middle East: Peace Negotiations

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps his Department is taking to assist coexistence education projects in Israel.

Ivan Lewis: The UK has provided financial support to educational projects which promote co-existence between Jewish and Arab children in Israel.

Middle East: Peace Negotiations

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance his Department is providing to projects to promote a shared society between Arab and Jewish citizens of Israel.

Ivan Lewis: The Government have spent over £100,000 in the current financial year to support projects and organisations that develop co-existence between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel.

Middle East: Peace Negotiations

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with his Israeli counterpart on equality between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel.

Ivan Lewis: The UK regularly raises concerns regarding equality issues. I discussed the issue of Israeli minorities in a meeting with the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister on 9 February. We also highlighted the issue in the 2009 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report on Human Rights, which was published on 17 March.

Poland: Anti-Semitism

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received on the defacing of monuments at the former Plaszow concentration camp near Krakow on Saturday 13 March 2010; what recent discussions he has had with the government of Poland on anti-Semitism in Poland; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: We condemn the act of vandalism against the monuments at the former Plaszow concentration camp and all instances of persecution and discrimination against individuals and groups wherever they occur.
	Polish politicians have spoken out strongly against this act. Polish Foreign Minister Sikorkski said:
	"The people who did this deserve the highest condemnation. This is something which ruins Poland and which I personally am ashamed of."
	Polish Cardinal Dziwish has apologised to Jewish people on behalf of all Christians for what happened.
	Our embassy in Warsaw was in touch with non-governmental organisations and relevant Government representatives that deal with and monitor anti-Semitism on 16 April 2009. The Polish Government highlighted some of their initiatives in their interim report, responding to a 2007 memorandum, to the Council of Europe Commissioner for human rights. This can be found on the Commissioner's website:
	http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/News/2009/090420Poland Report_en.asp

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport whether his Department provides subsidised gym facilities for its staff.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Department does provide subsidised gym facilities for its staff.

Departmental Consultants

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer to Baroness Warsi of 17 March 2010,  Official Report,  House of Lords, column 188WA, on Government Departments: consultancy services, which public affairs company provided the administrative support to the All-Party Horticultural Working Group with funding from the Royal Parks Agency.

Gerry Sutcliffe: Bellenden Public Affairs provided support to the All-Party Horticultural Working Group with funding from the Royal Parks Agency.

Departmental Internet

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport whether his Department and its agencies have incurred any expenditure on Google Adwords in the last 12 months.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Department and its agencies have not incurred any expenditure on Google Adwords in the last 12 months.

Departmental Internet

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what his Department's policy is on the use by its officials of computers for recreational web browsing  (a) at lunchtimes and  (b) other normal working hours; and for what reasons access to tobacco-related websites is blocked.

Ben Bradshaw: My Department's policy on internet usage is as follows:
	Do not access the internet during working hours for purposes other than those for which you are employed. Any personal use should be limited, carried out in non-working hours and should not interfere with the performance of your duties nor with the Department's IT/networking systems and services.
	Access to tobacco-related websites is blocked because they have no relevance to the work of the Department.

Ofcom: Standards

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what steps he takes to monitor the performance of Ofcom; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: I have been asked to reply.
	The Office of Communications (Ofcom) is the regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries. Ministers do not monitor Ofcom's performance because the regulator is independent of Government and is accountable directly to Parliament. Ofcom is required to report annually to Parliament through the annual plan and report and accounts.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Commercial Waste

Robert Goodwill: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether he plans to review arrangements for the collection of commercial waste following its recent redefinition.

Dan Norris: A change in the definition of municipal waste will not alter local authority responsibilities on commercial waste. The vast majority of commercial waste is managed by the private sector and we do not expect this to change. However, we do want to promote more sorting and recycling of commercial waste and have a number of measures in place including funding for pilot trade waste recycling points and collection schemes.

Bovine Tuberculosis

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent progress has been made in tackling the spread of bovine tuberculosis.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Veterinary Medicines Directorate yesterday issued an authorisation for a tuberculosis vaccine for use in badgers. This has been made possible by the hard work of the researchers at the Veterinary Laboratories Agency and the Food and Environment Research Agency and reflects 10 years and £11 million of DEFRA-funded research and development. This injectable vaccine will be used in the Badger Vaccine Deployment Project to commence in six areas in England from July.
	Recommendations from the October 2009 progress report of the TB Eradication Group for England have been implemented, including enhanced TB surveillance and control and additional support to farmers under TB restrictions.

Common Fisheries Policy

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what his Department's objectives are for the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy; and if he will make a statement.

Huw Irranca-Davies: The UK's response to the Commission's Green Paper on reform of the Common Fisheries Policy sets out our objectives to achieve prosperous, sustainable exploitation of fish stocks. This response makes clear that there must be more regionalised decision-making; genuine integration of fisheries with other marine policies; longer-term management planning; greater flexibility and certainty in the system; and a mechanism to ease the transition to a sustainable and profitable future.

Lost Life Report

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps he plans to take in response to Natural England's report, Lost life.

Huw Irranca-Davies: Our plans are already set out in Conserving Biodiversity-the UK Approach. We have set targets to 2020 to increase the range and populations of priority species and the extent and quality of priority habitats.

Drains

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reasons the Environment Agency has not introduced its General Binding Rules in England and Wales to prevent the abuse of the drainage system from non-agricultural, commercial and domestic industries in accordance with its original timetable.

Huw Irranca-Davies: Following DEFRA's consultation on non-agricultural diffuse pollution in 2007, we made a decision to progress each policy option separately. For example, we have recently consulted on options for legislative mechanisms to control phosphates in domestic laundry cleaning products in the UK. We have also proposed a requirement for developers to consider sustainable drainage systems for surface water for all new developments in the Flood and Water Management Bill.
	As part of this, the use of a legislative approach based on general binding rules (GBRs) is another of the options which we are developing. While we are not in a position to hold a consultation in the near future, as policy develops and further evidence of the impact of GBRs is gathered, we may hold a consultation. To commit to any policy on further development of GBRs we must be confident that any action would be of benefit to the environment, and that the economic and social impacts of the action are assessed.
	More information about policy work is available on our website at:
	www.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/water/waterquality/diffuse/non-agri/index.htm

Food Supply: Government Assistance

Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps his Department is taking to assist the food industry in the current economic climate.

Hilary Benn: Government are taking a number of steps to support the UK food industry which is our biggest manufacturing sector, including the Food 2030 Strategy, more investment in research and development, consulting on a supermarket ombudsman, the agri-skills plan and the work of the task forces to assist the pig sector and to encourage more production and consumption of fruit and vegetables.

Gangmasters

Mark Lazarowicz: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will review the effectiveness of legislation on gangmasters.

Dan Norris: I am content that the Gangmasters Licensing Act 2004 provides an effective regulatory framework, allowing the Gangmasters Licensing Authority to take a robust approach in enforcing its provisions.
	We have recently laid revised regulations which clarify when a licence is required and correct an anomaly in the application of the Gangmasters Licensing (Exclusions) Regulations 2006 which was identified following recent representations made by my hon. Friend.

Marine Conservation Zones

Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what the minimum conservation objective for marine conservation zones will be;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the likely effectiveness of the establishment of marine conservation zones in protecting the full range of biodiversity in UK waters.

Huw Irranca-Davies: The UK has and is making progress in reducing its environmental footprint in the marine area.
	Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are an integral part of our comprehensive marine policy. We are committed to designating enough MPAs by end 2012 to ensure we have contributed to a UK ecologically coherent network of sites.
	We consider that the concept of Good Environmental Status should guide the minimum level acceptable for Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) objectives, as far as that is an appropriate measure for a site-based conservation tool. This will be defined through implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

Members: Correspondence

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the Minister with responsibility for farming and the environment will reply to the hon. Member for Billericay's letters of 12 January and 15 February 2010 on his constituent Ms F Smith.

Jim Fitzpatrick: I replied to both of the hon. Member's letters on 23 March and I apologise for the intervening delay.

Recycling

Desmond Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when he or his officials last met representatives of the recycling industry to discuss local authorities' performance against recycling targets.

Dan Norris: DEFRA Ministers and officials meet representatives of the recycling industries on a regular basis to discuss a wide range of waste issues.

Recycling

Desmond Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the West Midlands in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the East of England in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in Greater London in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(4)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the South East in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(5)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the South West in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(6)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the East Midlands in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(7)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in Yorkshire and the Humber in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(8)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the North West in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;
	(9)  how much waste was recycled in each  (a) district council,  (b) borough council,  (c) unitary authority and  (d) other local authority area in the North East in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement;

Dan Norris: A table showing tonnages of waste sent for recycling, composting or reuse for all local authorities in England in the first quarter of financial year 2009-10 has been placed in the Library. The most recent full financial year data, which would take account of any seasonal changes, are available in Table 1 of the 2008-09 results for all authorities published on the DEFRA website:
	www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/wastats/bulletin09.htm

River Thames: Angling

Michael Fallon: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on what evidence the decision was taken to restrict the eel-fishing season in the Thames; and if he will place in the Library a copy of that evidence.

Huw Irranca-Davies: To ensure compliance with the European Eel Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007, the Eels (England and Wales) Regulations 2009 (No. 3344) establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel came into force on the 15 January 2010.
	As part of the Eels Regulations, close seasons have been introduced to curtail fishing effort at times of particular pressure on the stock: 26 May 2010 to 14 February 2011 for eels 12 centimetres or less, and 1 October 2010 to 31 March 2011 for all other eels.
	The 2010 close seasons were set nationally and coincide with peak runs for elvers and with the main silver eel net fishing season. The close seasons will be in force for one year to provide time to assess stocks in each river basin.
	In 2011, both adult eel and elver close seasons will be set through Environment Agency (EA) byelaws and will be specific to individual river basins to match local circumstances. The EA met with representatives of Thames eel fishermen in January this year to discuss the revision of byelaws.
	A copy of the Statutory Instrument together with the Explanatory Memorandum, which provides information to support the measures introduced through the Eels (England and Wales) Regulations 2009, has been placed in the Library.

Waste and Resources Action Programme

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will place in the Library a copy of each tender invitation issued by the Waste and Resources Action Programme in the last three years.

Dan Norris: I have arranged for copies of all the tender invitation documents that were published in the  Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) over the last three years to be placed in the Library of the House. Copies of all other tender invitation documents produced by WRAP over this period, including those with a value below the threshold for publication in the OJEU, could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Water

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on the role of water efficiency in reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

Huw Irranca-Davies: DEFRA recognises the role water efficiency can play in reducing energy use, especially through reduced hot water consumption. Last September the Department launched a water efficiency campaign under the Act on CO2 banner which highlighted the energy and carbon implications of water use. DEFRA officials are in ongoing discussions with Department of Energy and Climate Change counterparts to coordinate the delivery of programmes to improve energy and water efficiency.

Water

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has had with Ofwat on incentives for water efficiency to achieve his Department's water consumption targets; and if he will make a statement.

Huw Irranca-Davies: Each water company in England and Wales has had a duty to promote the efficient use of water by its customers. Ofwat is responsible for enforcing this duty and reports on progress in its annual Service and Delivery reports, available from its website. Following discussions within the Government-led Water Saving Group, Ofwat has introduced water efficiency targets for water companies from 2010-11 to 2014-15.

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Boilers: Government Assistance

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many households had used the boiler scrappage scheme to replace their boiler on the latest date for which figures are available.

Joan Ruddock: holding answer 18 March 2010
	At the last set of published figures as at 16 March 2010, 118,785 vouchers had been allocated. 35,390 boilers or renewable heating systems had been installed, based on the number of claims to date from householders.

Carbon Emissions: Housing

David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many items of domestic heating equipment are receiving funding for the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target scheme; what estimate has been made of the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from this funding; and if he will make a statement.

Joan Ruddock: Domestic heating products make up 6 per cent. of savings to date towards the 185 million tonne lifetime carbon dioxide savings target (April 2008-March 2011 time frame). This compares to some 62 per cent. of savings to date achieved through insulation products. There are seven heating product types eligible under CERT, but suppliers are not required to report the number of each installed until the end of the scheme. However, suppliers do report on a quarterly basis to Ofgem the number of microgeneration units installed (approximately 1,000 to December 2009) and the number of properties switched from coal or oil to gas central heating (approximately 100,000).

Carbon Emissions: Housing

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will take steps to ensure that energy efficiency services provided by energy suppliers under the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target scheme are monitored to ensure maximum  (a) cost effectiveness and  (b) energy efficiency.

Joan Ruddock: An independent assessment is commissioned at the end of each three year phase of the Supplier Obligation (now termed the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target), building on the cost-benefit assessment undertaken and published at the launch of each scheme. Independent analysis of the three year supplier obligation scheme ending March 2008 showed it to have been extremely cost effective in delivery-that for every £1 added on to GB household bills to pay for the obligation, benefits equate to an average saving of £9 per household bill over the lifetime of the measures. Equally, the present supplier obligation, the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target which ends in March 2011, is also believed to be highly cost-effective. Annual benefits (net of costs) are expected to be around £649 million for the lifetime of the measures, with around £228 benefits per tonne of carbon dioxide saved in the traded sector and £153 benefits per tonne of CO2 saved in the non-traded sector. Insulation measures make up over 60 per cent. of savings to target-equivalent to some 4 million households receiving insulation measures.

Departmental Temporary Employment

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change from which companies his Department sourced temporary staff in each of the last three years; how many temporary staff his Department employed in each year; and what the monetary value of the contracts with each such company was in each such year.

Joan Ruddock: Since its inception on 3 October 2008 my Department spent a total of £374,939 on temporary staff in the financial year 2008-09. The latest available figures for financial year 2009-10 show an expenditure of £1,603,259 on temporary staff.
	The information on the numbers of temporary staff and companies from which the staff was sourced can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Theft

Tom Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps his Department is taking to deter theft from within the Department.

Joan Ruddock: The Department has building access monitoring and control measures in place in accordance with Cabinet Office policy; requires all staff to wear passes while in the office; issues staff awareness guidance on its intranet; has a clear desk policy in place and provides secure storage for its staff.
	Ongoing security awareness activities are undertaken to ensure that DECC assets and information are handled appropriately and securely.

Electronic Warfare

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the effects on the critical infrastructure of his Department of an electromagnetic pulse strike caused  (a) deliberately and  (b) through solar activity.

Joan Ruddock: The Government's Cyber Security Strategy of the United Kingdom, published alongside and reflected in the National Security Strategy update of June 2009, considers a number of methods of cyber attack, including those that generate high levels of power that can damage or disrupt unprotected electronics. It also outlines the new governance structures and workstreams which are now building on existing work to take forward the Government's plan for reducing the impact on and vulnerability of the UK's interests from cyber attacks.
	The Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI) provides advice on electronic or cyber protective security measures to the businesses and organisations that comprise the UK's critical national infrastructure, including public utilities, companies and banks. CPNI also runs a CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team) service which responds to reported attacks on private sector networks. In addition, CESG provides Government Departments with advice and guidance on how to protect against, detect and mitigate various types of cyber attack.
	It would not be in the interests of national security to provide information about specific vulnerabilities, assessments or protective measures relating to electromagnetic pulse attack.

Energy: Housing

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough of 3 March 2010,  Official Report, column 1205W, on energy: housing, what the cost to the public purse of the Energy Saving Trust's Penistone area project has been to date.

Joan Ruddock: The total cost of the Penistone Area Based Initiative campaign was £8,783.96.

Energy: Prices

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change for what reasons the EU Directive on  (a) an internal market in electricity and  (b) Common Rules for an Internal Market in Natural Gas was not implemented until September 2009; and what assessment he has made of the effects on energy prices of the timing of the implementation of each directive.

David Kidney: The Government believe they have done all that is required to implement the Internal Market in Electricity and Gas directives. The Commission was notified of the implementation of the directive (except for provisions relating to the requirement for electricity companies to disclose their fuel mix to final customers and the requirement for Ofgem to act as dispute settlement authority between energy undertakings) in October 2004. No assessment has been made of the effects on energy prices of the timing of the implementation of each directive.

Information Commissioner

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what data loss incidents his Department has reported to the Information Commissioner since its creation.

Joan Ruddock: No data loss incidents have been reported to the Information Commissioner by DECC since its inception.

Redpoint: Expenditure

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much his Department paid to Redpoint for the production of the report entitled  (a) implementation of the EU 2020 renewables target in the UK electricity sector: RO Reform and  (b) Carbon Capture and Storage demonstration: analysis of policies on coal/CCS and financial incentive schemes; and how much his Department has paid to Redpoint since 3 October 2008.

Joan Ruddock: The Department has paid a total of £533,486 to Redpoint since 3 October 2008. The total paid for the RO Reform report was £155,710 and £142,427 for the Carbon Capture and Storage report. The costs include VAT.

Water

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the contribution of domestic hot water use to national  (a) energy consumption and  (b) carbon dioxide emissions.

Joan Ruddock: The Government's UK Low Carbon Transition Plan published in July 2009 covered energy use and CO2 emissions from the domestic sector. It highlights that the energy used in our homes for heating water (excluding that for heating our homes) is 25 per cent. of the overall domestic energy use.
	The Environment Agency have carried out extensive research on the CO2 emissions from domestic hot water use. Their latest research suggests that annual emissions from heating water in a typical home are approximately 900kgCO2. This at the UK level these represent ~23MtCO2/yr of the 140.7MtCO2/yr attributable to energy end use in homes (including emissions from electricity use in homes).
	Further information can be found in the Environment Agency report here:
	http://www.grdp.org/business/topics/water/109835.aspx

Water

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what account has been taken of the role of water efficiency when developing the Home Energy Management Strategy.

Joan Ruddock: The Government's Household Energy Management Strategy 'Green Homes, Warmer Homes', published on 2 March:
	http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/what_we_do/consumers/saving_energy/hem/hem.aspx
	focuses on cutting carbon emissions from the household sector through energy efficiency and other measures. In developing the strategy, my Department met representatives of a variety of organisations, including Waterwise who campaign on water efficiency.

Wind Power: Compensation

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will meet representatives of the inshore fishing industry to discuss compensation to that industry from offshore wind farm operators.

David Kidney: The general principles of arrangements for compensation for fishermen adversely affected by wind farm development have been discussed at length in the Fishing Liaison with Offshore Wind and Wet Renewables Group on which my Department, wind developers and the fishing industry are represented. The group, which includes a representative from the inshore fishing sector, has produced best practice guidance that can be found at
	http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/what_we_do/uk_supply/energy_mix/renewable/policy/offshore/groups/groups.aspx
	This guidance includes an appendix dealing with issues concerning assessing the value of fishing activities and related compensation, disruption or displacement payments.

TRANSPORT

A13: Litter

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what contractual obligations apply to the contract for the A13/A1089 in Thurrock held by Connect Plus Group for cleaning and collecting rubbish and litter from the highways and its embankments; how performance against those obligations is monitored; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Mole: The contractual obligations that apply to Connect Plus for the cleaning and collecting of rubbish and litter from the A13/A1089 highway and its embankments require the contractor to perform routine services in respect of sweeping and cleaning.
	The general requirement is to comply with the standards of cleanliness set out in the Environmental Protection Act 1990: Code of Practice on Litter and Refuse, for the sweeping and cleaning of all channels and hard shoulders, verges, central reservations, lay-bys, slopes, removal of litter and sweeping of footways and cycle tracks.
	Performance against these sweeping and cleaning obligations is measured and reported to the Highways Agency for review on a monthly basis.

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport how much his Department spent on interior design in relation to office refurbishments undertaken in each of the last five years.

Chris Mole: The information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

East Coast Railway Line

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what his most recent assessment is of the likely date for returning the East Coast Main Line franchise to the private sector.

Chris Mole: The planned start date of the new franchise is November 2011.

East Coast Railway Line

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport how much it has cost the public purse to run the railway services on the East Coast Main Line in each month since 13 December 2009.

Chris Mole: East Coast is a revenue generative business which returns a surplus to the public purse. Payments are made on a rail period rather than monthly basis. The following table shows the payments that East Coast is contracted to make in its first five periods of operation which show that the business will return some £47 million to the public purse during this time.
	
		
			  Rail period   Amount (£) 
			 Period 9 (part period) 13 November 2009 to 12 December 2009 (1)12,636,157 
			 Period 10 13 December 2009 to 9 January 2010 (2)(4,630,742) 
			 Period 11 10 January 2010 to 6 February 2010 (1)14,183,011 
			 Period 12 7 February 2010 to 6 March 2010 (1)13,786,696 
			 Period 13 7 March 2010 to 31 March 2010 (1)11,112,614 
			 Total  (1)47,087,736 
			 (1) Payment to DFT. (2) Payment to East Coast.

East Coast Railway Line

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what his estimate is of the likely cost to the public purse of the failure of National Express's East Coast Main Line franchise.

Chris Mole: It is not possible to estimate the likely cost to the public purse of the failure of National Express's East Coast franchise at present. The final cost is dependent on the resolution of outstanding issues with National Express, the level of ticket revenue generated by East Coast and the value achieved for the franchise when it is re-let.

East Coast Railway Line

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport how many jobs were lost  (a) directly and  (b) indirectly as a result of the failure of National Express's East Coast Main Line franchise.

Chris Mole: No jobs were lost either directly or indirectly as a result of the failure of National Express's East Coast Mainline franchise.
	Some changes were made to the executive team with a new Managing Director appointed before the handover and three new Directors since.

East Coast Railway Line

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what his estimate is of the financial effects on the economy of the failure of National Express's East Coast Main Line franchise.

Chris Mole: The failure of National Express East Coast will not result in a cost to the economy. The Government ensured the continuity of rail services through the use of its statutory powers.

First Capital Connect

Paul Burstow: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what meetings have been held between Ministers in his Department and  (a) First Capital Connect,  (b) the Office of the Rail Regulator and  (c) others on the performance of First Capital Connect in the period 1 October 2009 to 31 January 2010; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Mole: holding answer 4 February 2010
	I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 27 January 2010,  Official Report, column 877W.
	Ministers have not had any meetings with the Office of Rail Regulation about First Capital Connect during that period. However, Ministers have regular meeting to discuss the performance of all train operating companies, including First Capital Connect.
	The Secretary of State had a further meeting with the Chief Executive of First Group and the Managing Director of First Capital Connect on 2 February.

Infrastructure: National Policy Statements

Angela Smith: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport when the National Policy Statement for National Networks will be published.

Chris Mole: An announcement on the publication of the National Networks National Policy Statement will be made in due course.

Languages

Philip Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport how many  (a) Ministers and  (b) civil servants in his Department received coaching in a foreign language in the last 12 months; what expenditure his Department incurred in providing such coaching; and in what languages such coaching was provided.

Chris Mole: No Ministers have received coaching in a foreign language in the last 12 months.
	The following table provides a break down of Civil Servants within the Department for Transport and its agencies who have received coaching in a Foreign Language:
	
		
			  Foreign Language(s)  Number of civil servants receiving foreign language coaching  Expenditure incurred 
			 Chinese, German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, BSL and Welsh 13 1,304

Network Rail: Finance

Greg Hands: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport 
	(1)  what the projected budget allocation is for Network Rail in respect of  (a) station maintenance,  (b) track maintenance,  (c) vegetation and tree management,  (d) signal maintenance,  (e) points, switches and crossings maintenance,  (f) drainage maintenance,  (g) fencing maintenance,  (h) bridge and other structure maintenance,  (i) buildings maintenance,  (j) litter collection and policing,  (k) graffiti removal and policing and  (l) CCTV for the next 10 years;
	(2)  what budget was allocated to Network Rail in respect of  (a) station maintenance,  (b) track maintenance,  (c) vegetation and tree management,  (d) signal maintenance,  (e) points, switches and crossings maintenance,  (f) drainage maintenance,  (g) fencing maintenance,  (h) bridge and other structure maintenance,  (i) buildings maintenance,  (j) litter collection and policing,  (k) graffiti removal and policing and  (l) CCTV in each year since its inception;
	(3)  what the projected budget allocation is for Network Rail in each of the next 10 years;
	(4)  what Network Rail's budget allocation was in each year since its inception.

Chris Mole: Information about the funding available to Network Rail in the coming years is published by the independent Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) in its document, Periodic review 2008, Determination of Network Rail's outputs and funding for 2009-14. The document is available on ORR's website at:
	http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/383.pdf
	Details of Network Rail's historic budget allocations are published in the company's annual Regulatory Financial Statements, which are available on its website at:
	http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browseDirectory.aspx?dir=\ Regulatory%20Documents\Regulatory%20Compliance %20and%20Reporting\Regulatory%20 Accountspageid=2893root

Parking: Housing

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport whether he has made an estimate of the proportion of households affected by  (a) yellow line and  (b) controlled parking zone restrictions in each year since 1997.

Sadiq Khan: The introduction of yellow line parking restrictions or controlled parking zones are matters for individual local authorities, following appropriate consultation. No central record is kept of these local decisions, and the Government have made no estimate of the proportion of households affected.

Railway Stations: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport pursuant to the answer of 7 December 2009,  Official Report, columns 40-1W, on railway stations: Greater London, at which stations in Greater London improvement is  (a) completed,  (b) under way but not completed,  (c) scheduled to start in 2010-11,  (d) scheduled to start in 2011-12 and  (e) scheduled to start in 2012-13.

Chris Mole: There are currently 38 stations in London boroughs in the Access for All Programme. Of these, 10 are complete or will be complete by the end of this financial year. Work is under way on a further three. According to Network Rail's latest delivery plan, there are seven stations where work is due to start on site in 2010-11, 11 in 2011-12, six in 2012-13, and one from 2013 onwards. A document listing the stations which are at each stage has been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Railways: Construction

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport for what reasons no environment impact assessment was produced ahead of the consultation on the High Speed Two Exceptional Hardship Schemes; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Mole: The proposed Exceptional Hardship Scheme sets out proposals to help certain home-owners who may be affected by blight following publication of the Government's response to HS2 Ltd'.s recommendations. The scheme is not a project for the purposes of Council Directive 1985/337/EEC on the assessment of effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. Accordingly, no environmental impact assessment is required.
	If a decision is taken to proceed with high speed rail, the appropriate environmental assessment would form part of any preparations for the introduction of a Hybrid Bill.

Railways: Construction

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport for what reasons Buckinghamshire county council has not been included on the list of consultees for the consultation on the High Speed Two Exceptional Hardship Scheme.

Chris Mole: Buckinghamshire county council is regarded as a consultee. The leader and chief executive were sent copies of all the relevant materials following the Statement on high speed rail by the Secretary for State for Transport. Any individual or organisation can request copies of and respond to the Exceptional Hardship Scheme consultation. Copies are available from DFT Publications at
	www.dft.gov.uk/foi/dftps/howtoobtaindftpublications/form
	or telephone 0300 123 1102.

Railways: Construction

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport on what date his Department plans to respond to the participants in the consultation on the High Speed Two Exceptional Hardship Scheme.

Chris Mole: The consultation closes on 20 May 2010. The Government recognise the importance to affected property owners of introducing the scheme, should they decide to do so, as quickly as is practicable. We would expect this to be in June.

Railways: Construction

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what meetings  (a) he,  (b) Ministers in his Department and  (c) his officials have had with interested parties on the three alternative routes for High Speed Two through the Chilterns; what the (i) purpose and (ii) outcome was of each such meeting; and if he will place a copy of the minutes of each such meeting in the Library.

Chris Mole: High Speed Rail was published on 11 March 2010. Prior to this Ministers and officials in the Department held no meetings with interested parties outside the Government at which HS2 Ltd. proposed routes from London to the West Midlands were discussed. Following the publication of the Command Paper, the Secretary of State for Transport, has held meetings with various hon. Members, and other stakeholders, to discuss high speed rail in general and/or in relation to constituency or local interests.

Railways: Construction

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what advice he has  (a) sought and  (b) received on the compatibility of the conduct of his Department's High Speed Two Exceptional Hardship Scheme consultation with guidance on the conduct of consultations during an election period.

Chris Mole: The Department consulted the HM Government Code of Practice on Consultation, which recommends that consultations should not generally be launched during election periods. The consultation on the Exceptional Hardship Scheme was launched on 11 March, while Parliament was sitting. The Government recognise the importance to affected property owners of introducing the scheme, should they decide to do so, as quickly as is practicable. The timing of the launch was determined accordingly. In addition, the duration of the consultation was shortened-to 10 weeks instead of the recommended 12-for the same reason.

Railways: Fares

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what estimate he has made of the annual percentage change to the cost of travelling by rail in each year since 2000.

Chris Mole: The estimate of the annual percentage change to the cost of travelling by rail in each year since 2000 is shown in the following table, next to the percentage change in disposable income for comparison.
	
		
			   Rail fares (£)  Percentage change  Disposable income (£)  Percentage change 
			 2000 102.97 1.03 109.36 4.11 
			 2001 105.45 2.41 114.29 4.51 
			 2002 106.88 1.36 116.57 1.99 
			 2003 108.24 1.27 120.05 2.98 
			 2004 110.49 2.08 121.01 0.79 
			 2005 114.55 3.67 124.37 2.77 
			 2006 112.58 -1.72 126.17 1.45 
			 2007 114.1 1.35 126.29 0.09 
			 2008 116.54 2.14 n/a n/a

Richard Bowker

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport on what occasions the Secretary of State has  (a) met and  (b) spoken with Richard Bowker since 3 October 2008.

Chris Mole: As Minister of State the current Secretary of State for Transport, my noble Friend (Lord Adonis), met or spoke with Richard Bowker, the then chief executive of the National Express Group, on 23 October 2008, 28 November 2008, 18 February 2009 and 21 April 2009. Since becoming Secretary of State he had one meeting with Mr. Bowker on 9 June 2009.
	The previous Secretary of State for Transport met with Mr. Bowker on 20 January and 25 February 2009.
	Some of these meetings were specifically to discuss issues relating to National Express Group plc or its subsidiaries; others were wider events involving other transport stakeholders.

Road Works

Michael Fallon: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what progress his Department has made on amending the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions Order 2002 in order to enable the installation of portable pedestrian crossings at road works.

Sadiq Khan: The Department for Transport consulted on draft amendments to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 between September and December 2009. These include proposals to permit portable pedestrian facilities. Officials at the Department are considering the responses received and will be revising the draft regulations to address the issues raised.

Roads: Tolls

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport if he will  (a) rule out a national satellite-based road pricing scheme and  (b) end all funding in respect of road pricing and road pricing demonstration projects.

Sadiq Khan: The Government have already ruled out national road pricing in this or the next Parliament. However the Government are contractually committed to funding up to December 2010 the 'Demonstrations' projects that look at the technological, operational and organisational challenges around widespread Time/Distance/Place road pricing. The Government have no plans to undertake further 'Demonstrations' projects.

Social Security Benefits

Jim Cousins: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what the earnings disregard is for each means-tested benefit administered by his Department; and when each such disregard was first set.

Chris Mole: The information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Stephen Byers

Norman Baker: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport on what dates he discussed matters relating to National Express with the right hon. Member for North Tyneside since 1 January 2009.

Chris Mole: My noble Friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Lord Adonis) had a brief conversation in the House of Commons with the right hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) in June 2009 about the East Coast Main Line. The Secretary of State does not recall the precise date (although it cannot have been before 8 June, his first full week in office).

Stephen Byers

Norman Baker: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport if he will place in the Library a copy of each  (a) email and  (b) letter received by his Department from the right hon. Member for North Tyneside on National Express.

Chris Mole: The Department for Transport has not received any emails or letters from the right hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) about National Express.

Stephen Byers

Dai Davies: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport if he will publish the  (a) correspondence and  (b) notes of discussions between his Department and the right hon. Member for North Tyneside on the operation by National Express of the East Coast Rail subsidiary franchise in 2009.

Chris Mole: The Department for Transport has not received any correspondence from the right hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) on the operation by National Express of the East Coast Rail subsidiary franchise.
	My noble Friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Lord Adonis) had a brief conversation in the House of Commons with the right hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) in June 2009 about the East Coast Main Line.
	As this was a conversation in the House of Commons there is no official note. However, the Secretary of State has stated for the record that they discussed the right hon. Member's experience in dealing with rail franchise difficulties when Transport Secretary. As regards the situation then facing National Express the Secretary of State told him that despite the company's difficulties he had no intention whatsoever of renegotiating the East Coast franchise on terms favourable to the company, as the company was seeking in its approaches to the Department for Transport. The Secretary of State also told the right hon. Member that in his view such a move would undermine the rail franchise system and would not be in the best interests of tax payers.

Stephen Byers

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport on what date in June 2009 the Secretary of State was approached by the right hon. Member for North Tyneside on the issue of penalties to be levied against National Express; who first raised the issue; what record was made of the approach; and on what date the Permanent Secretary of his Department was informed that the meeting had taken place.

Chris Mole: At the instigation of the right hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers), my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Lord Adonis) had a brief conversation with him about the East Coast Main Line in the House of Commons in June 2009. The Secretary of State does not recall the precise date (although this cannot have been before 8 June, his first full week in office), and as this was a conversation in the House of Commons there is no official note.
	However, the Secretary of State has stated for the record that they discussed the right hon. Member's experience in dealing with rail franchise difficulties when Transport Secretary. As regards the situation then facing National Express, the Secretary of State told him that despite the company's difficulties he had no intention whatsoever of renegotiating the East Coast franchise on terms favourable to the company, as the company was seeking in its approaches to the Department for Transport. The Secretary of State also told the right hon. Member that in his view such a move would undermine the rail franchise system and would not be in the best interests of tax payers.
	The Permanent Secretary of the Department for Transport was informed of the conversation shortly after it took place.

Transport Innovation Fund

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport whether the Urban Challenge Fund will use funding from the Transport Innovation Fund; and how much funding will be provided to the Transport Innovation Fund.

Sadiq Khan: I refer the hon. Member to my written statement on the Urban Challenge Fund on 2 March 2010,  Official Report, columns 107-08WS.

JUSTICE

Arrest Warrants: War Crimes

Phyllis Starkey: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  pursuant to the answer of 18 March 2010,  Official Report, column 1012W, on arrest warrants: war crimes, on what date the paper 'Arrest Warrants - Universal Jurisdiction' was placed on his Department's website;
	(2)  if he will list all the interested individuals and organisations to which a copy of the paper was sent.

Claire Ward: The paper 'Arrest Warrants - Universal Jurisdiction' was placed on the Ministry of Justice website on 17 March. It has been sent to the District Bench (Magistrates' Courts) Legal Committee and to the Jewish Leadership Council, as well as to the persons and bodies listed in my answer of 18 March 2010.

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991: Convictions

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the answer of 30 March 2009 , Official Report, columns 979-90W, on Dangerous Dogs Act 1991: convictions, how many people in  (a) London and  (b) England were (i) charged with and (ii) convicted of offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in each of the last three years; how many such convictions were under (A) section 1 and (B) section 3 of the Act; and how many resulted in a (1) destruction order, (2) disqualification order, (3) custodial sentence, (4) fine on Level 1 of the standard scale, (5) fine on Level 2 of the standard scale, (6) fine on Level 3 of the standard scale, (7) fine on Level 4 of the standard scale and (8) fine on Level 5 of the standard scale.

Claire Ward: The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts, found guilty and sentenced at all courts for offences under Section 1 and 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, in London Government Office Region and England in 2008 (latest available) can be viewed in the table.
	Charging data are not held by the Ministry of Justice, thus prosecutions data have been provided in lieu.
	Information on destruction and disqualification orders is not held centrally and can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	Court data for 2009 are planned for publication in the autumn, 2010.
	
		
			  Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts, found guilty and sentenced at all courts for offences under Section 1 and 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, London Government office region (G.O.R) and England 2008( 1, 2) 
			   Fine bands( 3)  
			  Area/Section of the Act  Proceeded against  Found guilty  Sentenced  Fine  £ 0 -£ 200  £ 201 - £ 500  £501- £ 1, 000  £1,001- £ 2,000  £2,001- £ 5,000  Sentenced to immediate custody 
			  London G.O.R   
			 Section 1(4) 62 51 51 27 20 7 - - - 2 
			 Section 3(5) 150 97 97 24 19 4 1 - - 7 
			
			  England   
			 Section 1(4) 137 115 115 54 44 10 - - - 6 
			 Section 3(5) 1,024 713 709 223 167 44 12 - - 20 
			 (1) The figures given in the table on court proceedings relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe. (2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (3) The levels associated with fines do not relate to the amount of the fine but to the offence committed and the statutory maximum that may be issued for that offence. Therefore as the maximum fine for each of these offences is a level 5 every fine issued for these offences would be considered as a level 5 fine; as it would cover the range £0-£5000. We have therefore shown the number of fines issued by band. (4) Section 1 includes the following offences:  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(a). Breeding or breeding from a fighting dog.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(b). Selling, exchanging, offering, advertising or exposing for sale a fighting dog.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(c). Giving or offering to give a fighting dog.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(d). Allowing a fighting dog to be in a public place without a muzzle or a lead.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(e). Abandoning, or allowing to stray, a fighting dog.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(3). Possession, without exemption, of a Pit Bull Terrier, Japanese Tosa or other designated fighting dog. (5) Section 3 includes the following offences:  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(1). Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place injuring any person  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(3). Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non-public place and injure any person.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(1). Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place, no injury being caused.  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(3). Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non-public place causing reasonable apprehension of injury to a person.  Notes:  Magistrates courts In the case of sentences at magistrates courts, a change was made to the categorisation by area as part of the rollout of the Libra case management system in magistrates courts during 2008. Sentences given at courts using the Libra system are categorised according to the criminal justice area of the court, while sentences given at courts not yet using the Libra system are categorised in the same way as at the Crown court. By the end of 2008, all magistrates courts were using Libra. This change will have almost no impact on the categorisation by area; only around 0.01 percent of sentences at magistrates courts could have been affected in 2007 and 2008. Police forces do not prosecute minor offences (those that are sentenced at magistrates courts) in courts outside their areas.  Crown  c ourt Sentences at the Crown court are categorised according to the police force that prosecuted the offence including those sentences that may be given at a court outside the prosecuting police force's area.  Source:  Justice Statistics Analytical Services in the Ministry of Justice

Debt Collection: Regulation

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he plans to announce his plans for the future regulation of the debt management industry.

Bridget Prentice: The consultation paper Debt Management Schemes-delivering effective and balanced solutions for debtors and creditors, published on 18 September 2009, looked at the current operation of the debt management market. It sought views on whether any changes were needed in this area and, if so, what those changes should be.
	The consultation paper set out three broad options. First, to continue with the measures currently under way to raise awareness about current schemes and enforce existing rules with operators. Second, to improve current schemes without regulation, possibly through the introduction of a protocol. Or third, to implement the Lord Chancellor's powers to approve debt management schemes contained in Chapter 4 of Part 5 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
	An initial impact assessment was published alongside the consultation paper which considered the potential effectiveness of all of the options contained in the consultation paper.
	The responses to the consultation are currently being considered in detail to inform the Government's decision on what action is appropriate and necessary. This decision will be announced in the Government's response to the consultation which will be published as soon as possible.

Departmental Internet

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether his Department and its agencies have incurred expenditure on Google AdWords campaigns in the last 12 months.

Michael Wills: Google AdWords help connect an organisation with potential customers by placing relevant advertisements on the right-hand-side of Google search results pages.
	The nature of the public services delivered by the Ministry of Justice-principally administering the courts, prisons, probation and tribunals systems-do not generally involve advertising, via any medium, to reach their target audience.
	We are aware of only one instance where Google AdWords has been used to communicate the Department's services in the last 12 months. This involved expenditure of £759.42 on 'The Community Payback Campaign'.
	All expenditure by the Ministry of Justice is undertaken in accordance with the principles of regularity, propriety and value for money contained in HM Treasury's 'Managing Public Money' and in pursuit of departmental aims and objectives.

Departmental Written Questions

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what methodology his Department used to determine whether answers to questions in the formulation if he will set out with statistical information related as directly as possible to the tabling hon. Member's constituency the effects on that constituency of his Department's policies since 1997 could be provided without incurring disproportionate cost; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: In all answers to questions formulated as identified, data were provided at a geographical level most closely relevant to the constituency of the MP asking the question, taking into account the cost limit for extraction of data.

Ex-servicemen: Probation

Neil Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many armed forces veterans on  (a) a court order and  (b) parole were being supervised by the Probation Service at the latest date for which figures are available;
	(2)  how many armed forces veterans were serving custodial sentences in  (a) Manchester,  (b) Durham and  (c) Everthorpe prison on the latest date for which figures are available.

Maria Eagle: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) on 2 March 2010,  Official Report, column 1068W.

Juries

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 1 March 2010,  Official Report, columns 932-34W, on juries, how many people were  (a) required and  (b) summoned for jury service in each year from 1990 to 2000; and how many of those summoned (i) were disqualified and (ii) refused to undertake jury service for each reason in each such year.

Bridget Prentice: The information requested from 1990-2000 for how many people were required for jury service, summoned for jury service, were disqualified and those who refused to undertake jury service are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. This is because the summoning process was undertaken and the records were held manually at each Crown court in England and Wales.

Lionel Crabb

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 22 March 2010,  Official Report, column 20W, on Lionel Crabb, which Departments have retained portions of the records under section 3.4 of the Public Records Act.

Michael Wills: Portions of records within PREM 11/2077 will have been retained by the Prime Minister's Office and portions of records within ADM 1/29241 will have been retained by the Ministry of Defence, all under section 3.4 of the Public Records Act.

Prisoners: Per Capita Costs

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what methodology is used to estimate the average cost of a prison place; and whether the costs of  (a) administration of the National Offender Management Service national and regional structures,  (b) prisoner health care,  (c) education services,  (d) drug services,  (e) dog handling and  (f) Prison Service administration are taken into account in determining the average cost of a prison place.

Maria Eagle: The average cost of a prison place comprises the expenditure on public and private prisons (as recorded in the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) Agency Annual Report and Accounts), increased by an apportionment of relevant costs borne centrally and in the regions by NOMS. This involves some estimation. In addition, expenditure met centrally by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) is included. The figures do not include the cost of prisoners held in police or court cells under Operation Safeguard, nor expenditure met by other Government Departments (e.g. health and education). The prisoner escort service costs are included. Where the costs of young people are recharged by NOMS to the YJB, expenditure is shown gross and not reduced by income from the YJB.
	For 2008-09 the overall cost of a prison place was £45,000 (to nearest £1,000). This includes expenditure met by NOMS national and regional structures, including Prison Service administration, and the YJB. It does not include expenditure met by other Government Departments (e.g. for health and education).
	In general health care and education costs are not included. Where prisons have been contracted out to the private sector the cost to NOMS includes health care and this is included in the cost per place above. In general prisoner education is not included. In general clinical drug addiction services are not included. Services which are the responsibility of NOMS (e.g. drug testing, accredited drug treatment programmes and Counselling, Assessment, Referral advice and Throughcare services) are included. Dog handling costs are included.
	Before 2008-09, Her Majesty's Prison Service annual report and accounts included the direct prison cost per place. This included only the expenditure met and managed locally at each prison and excluded expenditure met at area, region or national level. The reported figures included expenditure on health care and education which was recharged to the other Government Departments. It did not include that expenditure met directly by other Government Departments.
	Cost per prison place is expressed in terms of the Certified Normal Accommodation number of places; this gives a higher unit cost than the cost per prisoner.

Probation: Per Capita Costs

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the average cost to the public purse was of probation supervision of a person for a year on the latest date for which figures are available.

Maria Eagle: Costs will vary depending on the nature and intensity of the supervision. The National Audit Office Report (NAO), The Supervision of Community Orders in England and Wales (January 2008) included an estimate of the cost of delivering a supervision requirement. The NAO reviewed five probation areas and estimated the average annual cost in those areas of delivering the supervision requirement to be £652. This estimate did not include the cost of probation overheads. Research indicates that female offenders have more identified needs on average than male offenders with a similar risk of re-offending, therefore supervision is often more expensive. The NAO report above did not account for this variable in their estimates. The Specification, Benchmarking and Costing programme in the National Offender Management Service is defining what it should cost to deliver services and this work is due to be completed by 2011.

Probation: Per Capita Costs

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his most recent estimate is of the average cost of housing an individual in a probation hostel or in approved premises for 12 months.

Maria Eagle: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 23 February 2010,  Official Report, column 498W. The current grant for approved premises (formerly known as probation or bail hostels) equates to an average £26,600 per bed space for the current financial year, unchanged from the previous year. More than one resident will occupy a single bed space in approved premises over the course of a year, with an average stay of 74.7 days per resident.

Probation: Per Capita Costs

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his most recent estimate is of the average cost of providing Probation Service supervision to an individual on unpaid work for  (a) 160 hours and  (b) 240 hours.

Maria Eagle: The funding for the supervision of offenders sentenced to unpaid work is part of the general grant provided to probation areas. The actual costs will vary between areas and according to the type of work placement.
	The National Offender Management Service Specification Benchmarking and Costing Programme, has produced a service specification for unpaid work / Community Payback based on an assumed operating model. This will enable more accurate calculations of costs and is used by probation areas and Directors of Offender Management to assess Community Payback as part of a best value exercise.
	The service specification for unpaid work/Community Payback calculates the cost of commencement, including risk assessment and offender induction during the first two hours of the sentence at £82.40. For an offender attending a weekday work group in an urban area, the ongoing cost is calculated to be £8.83 an hour. The cost of a 160 hour sentence is therefore £1,477.54 and the cost of a 240 hour sentence is £2,183.94. These calculations do not include indirect costs such as premises, which will vary between probation areas. The hourly cost of Community Payback work at agency placements, where supervision is undertaken by the organisation benefiting from the work is less costly, while operating work groups at weekends and in remote locations is proportionally more costly.

Probation: Per Capita Costs

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what factors are taken into account in determining the cost of probation supervision for an individual  (a) with a condition and  (b) without a condition.

Maria Eagle: The supervision requirement is one of 12 requirements of a community order. The factors taken into account when costing the supervision requirement are:
	offender tier (there are four tiers in the National Offender Management Model describing different case management approaches and map against different resource levels and offender manager competences);
	the length of the offender's sentence;
	the offender's gender;
	the grade of staff working with the offender; and
	the time taken by staff to deliver the supervision requirement, which includes meetings with the offender, liaison with providers of specialist advice and feeding back to the offender manager. The level of engagement is primarily dependent on the tier of the offender.
	Gender of the offender is a factor when costing supervision requirement because the OASys research shows that women offenders at a given tier have on average a higher number of needs than male offenders. Therefore more contact time is assumed for women offenders than male offenders when costing the supervision requirement.
	Costs estimated using this bottom up process are not the full costs since they do not include overheads. Full costs of the supervision requirement will be collected and published in order to benchmark the whole of the probation system by the end of 2011.

Probation: West Yorkshire

Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people completed and passed a probation programme in each probation area in West Yorkshire in each year since 2005.

Maria Eagle: Between April 2005 and February 2010, 4,135 offenders have completed an accredited programme in the West Yorkshire probation area. In the first four years West Yorkshire probation area consistently over achieved in relation to its completion target for accredited programmes. The data for 2009-10 are for 11 months. Therefore it is not possible to say that this will be the case this year, as achievement for this period is 89 per cent. of the annual target.
	A full breakdown by district and programme type is shown in the following tables. Targeting by programme type began in April 2007 and a more detailed breakdown between the various types of programme is available from this point. The accredited offending behaviour programme category includes the suite of accredited programmes delivered in West Yorkshire, other than domestic violence and sex offending. This includes thinking skills, substance misuse, and drink driving programmes.
	Programme delivery in West Yorkshire is organised within districts. However, in the two smallest districts (Calderdale and Wakefield), delivery is linked to neighbouring larger districts (Bradford and Kirklees). This means that an offender can begin a programme in another district rather than waiting to start in the district in which (s)he is resident. This is good practice in that a prompt start is more likely to result in successful programme completion.
	Accredited programme targets have been reduced in the past two years as the probation area has introduced a range of specified activities and alcohol treatment conditions for offenders who pose a lower risk of harm and reoffending, thereby reserving accredited programme provision for the more serious offenders. West Yorkshire plans to expand further its suite of interventions over the next two years to provide sentencers with a broader range of options.
	In 2009-10 a target was set for the programme completion rate (by district and programme). Across the probation area performance has exceeded target for offending behaviour and sex offender programmes but not for domestic violence. The range of provision will be increased in 2010 with an introduction of a shorter domestic abuse programme for less serious offenders in order to improve completion rates.
	
		
			  West Yorkshire Probation Programme Completions( 1) 
			Accredited OBP  Domestic violence  Sex offender  Total completions 
			Comp  Target  Rate (%)  Comp  Target  Rate (%)  Comp  Target  Rate  Comp  Target  Rate (%) 
			 2005-06 Bradford/ Calderdale - - - - - - - - - 340 248 137 
			  Wakefield/Kirklees - - - - - - - - - 302 248 122 
			  Leeds - - - - - - - - - 241 247 98 
			  West Yorks - - - - - - - - - 883 743 119 
			   
			 2006-07 Bradford/ Calderdale - - - - - - - - - 320 291 110 
			  Wakefield/Kirklees - - - - - - - - - 308 290 106 
			  Leeds - - - - - - - - - 286 290 99 
			  West Yorks - - - - - - - - - 914 871 105 
			   
			 2007-08 Bradford/ Calderdale 259 212 122 65 55 118 22 20 110 346 287 121 
			  Wakefield/Kirklees 183 212 86 51 60 85 22 20 110 256 292 88 
			  Leeds 209 212 99 62 60 103 20 20 100 291 292 100 
			  West Yorks 651 636 102 178 175 102 64 60 107 893 871 103 
			   
			 2008-09 Bradford/ Calderdale 201 188 107 54 50 108 16 20 80 271 258 105 
			  Wakefield/Kirklees 201 188 107 57 50 114 27 20 135 285 258 110 
			  Leeds 201 186 108 57 50 114 18 20 90 276 256 108 
			  West Yorks 603 562 107 168 150 112 61 60 102 832 772 108 
			   
			 2009-10 Bradford/ Calderdale 155 167 93 53 47 113 12 18 67 220 232 95 
			  Wakefield/Kirklees 113 166 68 38 47 81 1 16 6 152 229 66 
			  Leeds 160 166 96 63 47 134 18 18 100 241 231 104 
			  West Yorks 428 499 86 154 141 109 31 52 60 613 692 89 
			 (1) The table reflects that (1) the programmes target was not split by type until 2007-08, and (2) West Yorkshire currently divides it targets by super district as some districts deliver programmes for others, and (3) the 2009-10 figures do not include March which historically is the month in which the most completions occur. 
		
	
	
		
			  West Yorkshire Probation Current Completion rates( 1) 
			Accredited OBP  Domestic Violence  Sex Offender 
			Rate (%)  Target  Rate (%)  Target  Rate (%)  Target 
			 2009-10 Bradford/Calderdale 69 65 52 67 88 77 
			  Wakefield/Kirklees 69 65 70 67 90 77 
			  Leeds 60 65 63 67 66 77 
			  West Yorks 66 65 59 67 82 77 
			 (1) The completion rate measure has only been introduced in the last financial year.  Note: West Yorkshire probation current programmes: Addressing Substance Related Offending Drink Impaired Drivers  Thinking Skills Programme Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme Northumbria Sex Offender Group Programme Enhanced Thinking Skills Programme

Public Sector

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps his Department is taking to share services, functions and back offices with local authorities as part of the Total Place initiative.

Michael Wills: The Ministry of Justice is not taking steps to share services, functions and back offices with local authorities as part of the Total Place initiative. However, the Department is supportive of any local partners' decisions on sharing services, functions or back offices to make efficiency savings where they deem it appropriate. The Government's report on Total Place will be published alongside Budget 2010.

Repossession Orders: Mortgages

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many court orders for the repossession of homes were issued in each region in each quarter of each year from 2005 to 2009.

Bridget Prentice: Tables showing the numbers of claims leading to orders being made for the repossession of property by mortgage lenders and landlords in England and Wales by Government Office Region for 2005 to 2009 are shown as follows. The figures are based on the physical locations of the properties which were the subject of the court actions.
	These figures represent the numbers of claims leading to orders being made. This counting basis is more accurate than the number of orders made, because it removes the double-counting of instances where a single claim leads to more than one order. It is also a more meaningful measure of the number of homeowners who are subject to court repossession actions.
	These figures do not indicate how many properties have actually been repossessed. Repossessions can occur without a court order being made, while not all court orders result in repossession.
	Statistics on mortgage and landlord possession claims in the county courts of England and Wales broken down by region, local authority and court, are published by the Ministry of Justice on a quarterly basis on the Ministry's website at:
	http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/mortgatelandlord possession.htm
	
		
			  Table 1: Number of mortgage( 1)  possession claims leading to orders made( 2,)( )( 3,)( )( 4,)( )( 5)  for properties in England and Wales by Government Office Regions (GOR)( 6) , 2005-09 
			   Quarter  East  East Midlands  London  North East  North West  South East  South West  Wales  West Midlands  Yorkshire and the Humber  Not identified  Total 
			 2005 1 1,450 1,025 2,565 585 1,680 1,780 1,010 720 1,510 1,175 210 13,710 
			  2 1,880 1,495 3,325 785 2,225 2,370 1,125 1,025 1,750 1,625 235 17,845 
			  3 1,915 1,480 3,405 860 2,440 2,685 1,365 1,055 1,985 1,605 310 19,105 
			  4 1,820 1,575 3,460 825 2,285 2,295 1,190 1,005 1,785 1,755 260 18,260 
			   
			 2006 1 2,120 1,750 3,815 1,020 2,825 2,725 1,400 1,170 2,255 1,920 295 21,295 
			  2 1,985 1,850 3,650 1,105 3,045 2,600 1,325 1,265 2,375 2,005 275 21,475 
			  3 2,155 1,925 3,815 1,395 3,200 2,830 1,485 1,455 2,535 2,225 275 23,295 
			  4 2,080 1,780 3,525 1,350 3,360 2,515 1,305 1,430 2,310 2,085 210 21,950 
			   
			 2007 1 2,050 2,045 3,890 1,315 3,185 2,775 1,305 1,405 2,405 2,135 70 22,580 
			  2 1,930 1,715 3,480 1,250 3,485 2,535 1,365 1,330 2,380 2,165 65 21,695 
			  3 2,105 2,215 3,275 1,415 3,740 2,600 1,380 1,430 2,760 2,425 45 23,390 
			  4 2,095 1,985 3,020 1,385 3,835 2,515 1,395 1,660 2,640 2,420 40 22,990 
			   
			 2008 1 2,380 2,385 3,550 1,455 4,315 2,860 1,615 1,860 3,055 2,670 45 26,200 
			  2 2,760 2,465 3,865 1,775 5,060 3,165 1,890 1,960 3,555 3,025 65 29,585 
			  3 2,710 2,650 3,970 1,775 4,665 3,085 1,905 2,135 3,185 3,135 65 29,285 
			  4 2,390 2,385 3,475 1,660 4,215 2,750 1,805 1,795 3,225 2,940 55 26,695 
			   
			 2009 1 1,580 1,410 2,245 1,115 2,715 1,955 980 1,185 1,550 1,750 35 16,520 
			  2 1,740 1,490 2,810 1,290 3,135 2,205 1,280 1,195 1,970 1,910 15 19,040 
			  3 1,920 1,795 2,870 1,315 3,560 2,265 1,425 1,405 2,185 2,355 20 21,115 
			  4 1,435 1,280 2,100 965 2,385 1,820 990 1,025 1,600 1,875 25 15,495 
			 (1) Includes all types of mortgage lenders. (2) The number of claims that lead to an order includes all claims in which the first order, whether outright or suspended, is made during the period. (3) The court, following a judicial hearing, may grant an order for possession immediately. This entitles the claimant to apply for a warrant to have the defendant evicted. However, even where a warrant for possession is issued, the parties can still negotiate a compromise to prevent eviction. (4) Includes outright and suspended orders, the latter being where the court grants the claimant possession but suspends the operation of the order. Provided the defendant complies with the terms of suspension, which usually require the defendant to pay the current mortgage or rent instalments plus some of the accrued arrears, the possession order cannot be enforced. (5) All figures are rounded to the nearest 5. (6) The figures represent the location of the property within each Government Office Region as opposed to the location of the court where the orders were made.  Source: Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Number of landlord( 1,)( )( 2)  possession claims leading to orders made( 3,)( )( 4,)( )( 5,)( )( 6)  for properties in England and Wales by Government Office Regions (GOR)( 7) , 2005-09 
			   Quarter  East  East Midlands  London  North East  North West  South East  South West  Wales  West Midlands  Yorkshire and the Humber  Not identified  Total 
			 2005 1 2,105 1,915 5,700 1,490 3,665 2,915 1,655 1,305 2,565 2,390 1,285 26,985 
			  2 2,290 2,145 6,035 1,415 3,920 2,845 1,660 1,350 2,705 2,515 1,275 28,150 
			  3 2,300 2,060 6,010 1,250 3,665 2,895 1,665 1,620 2,750 2,275 1,220 27,710 
			  4 2,305 2,025 6,015 1,250 3,590 2,785 1,605 1,370 2,555 2,595 975 27,070 
			   
			 2006 1 2,375 2,095 6,165 1,365 3,725 2,755 1,750 1,400 2,785 2,380 995 27,795 
			  2 2,140 1,870 5,845 1,455 3,275 2,550 1,405 1,250 2,485 2,315 710 25,290 
			  3 2,110 1,865 6,230 1,335 3,335 2,535 1,480 1,600 2,745 2,395 580 26,210 
			  4 2,065 1,635 5,160 1,490 3,330 2,530 1,375 1,480 2,430 2,160 475 24,140 
			   
			 2007 1 2,105 1,630 5,700 1,380 3,070 3,095 1,575 1,260 2,495 2,275 300 24,885 
			  2 1,840 1,545 5,595 1,285 3,095 2,515 1,410 1,155 2,415 2,035 195 23,085 
			  3 2,105 1,790 6,000 1,395 3,420 2,775 1,520 1,385 2,750 2,120 200 25,455 
			  4 2,120 1,690 5,940 1,250 3,400 2,745 1,465 1,355 2,735 2,305 190 25,190 
			   
			 2008 1 2,095 1,780 5,950 1,145 3,625 3,065 1,550 1,325 2,665 2,270 190 25,665 
			  2 2,215 1,735 6,255 1,260 3,360 2,885 1,440 1,185 2,760 2,010 170 25,275 
			  3 2,280 1,800 6,665 1,160 3,250 2,770 1,485 1,210 2,605 2,025 160 25,415 
			  4 2,190 1,780 5,625 1,395 3,365 2,670 1,525 1,175 2,645 1,945 140 24,460 
			   
			 2009 1 2,380 1,925 5,765 1,350 3,195 2,840 1,515 1,285 2,350 1,940 105 24,655 
			  2 2,005 1,570 5,590 1,085 2,990 2,640 1,375 1,185 2,210 1,655 100 22,410 
			  3 2,245 1,735 5,755 1,240 3,180 2,810 1,365 1,135 2,285 1,840 75 23,675 
			  4 2,115 1,650 5,405 1,125 2,820 2,615 1,215 1,040 2,290 1,725 60 22,065 
			 (1) Includes all types of landlord whether social or private. (2) Landlord actions include those made under both standard and accelerated procedures. The accelerated procedure enables the orders to be made solely on the basis of written evidence for shorthold tenancies, when the fixed period of tenancy has come to an end. (3) The number of claims that lead to an order includes all claims in which the first order, whether outright or suspended, is made during the period. (4) The court, following a judicial hearing, may grant an order for possession immediately. This entitles the claimant to apply for a warrant to have the defendant evicted. However, even where a warrant for possession is issued, the parties can still negotiate a compromise to prevent eviction. (5) Includes outright and suspended orders, the latter being where the court grants the claimant possession but suspends the operation of the order. Provided the defendant complies with the terms of suspension, which usually require the defendant to pay the current mortgage or rent instalments plus some of the accrued arrears, the possession order cannot be enforced. (6) All figures are rounded to the nearest 5. (7) The figures represent the location of the property within each Government Office Region as opposed to the location of the court where the orders were made.  Source: Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	continued

Traffic Penalty Tribunal

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will designate the Traffic Penalty Tribunal as a public authority under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Michael Wills: The Government conducted a public consultation between 25 October 2007 and 1 February 2008 to seek views on which bodies might be included within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act by way of a section 5 order. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal was not nominated as part of this consultation, and so has not been considered for inclusion in the first section 5 order. However, the Government made clear in their response to the consultation published on 16 July 2009 that the first section 5 order would be an initial step, and that the extension of the Act would be kept under review.
	The bodies proposed for inclusion in the first section 5 order are:
	academy schools
	Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO)
	financial Ombudsman Service
	UCAS.

Victim Support Schemes: Yorkshire and the Humber

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 16 March 2010,  Official Report, column 836W, on victim support schemes: York, how much funding was provided for victim support schemes at all North Yorkshire magistrates' courts, including those in York, in 2008-09; and how many people were supported by such schemes in that year.

Claire Ward: In 2008-09 the North Yorkshire Magistrates Courts Witness Service received £74,354 funding from the Government grant to Victim Support.
	In the same year the service provided support at magistrates courts in North Yorkshire to 1,905 witnesses.

Young Offenders: Location

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 14 July 2009,  Official Report, columns 261-62W, on young offenders: sports, what percentage of  (a) 12,  (b) 13,  (c) 14,  (d) 15,  (e) 16,  (f) 17,  (g) 18 and  (h) 19 years old in each young offender institution were detained within (i) 20, (ii) 30 and (iii) 40 miles away from their homes in each year since 2002.

Maria Eagle: The following tables show the percentage of 15 to 19-year-old male and female offenders in young offender institutions (YOIs) who were detained within 20 miles, 30 miles and 40 miles of their home area, as of September 2005 through September to 2008. Information for 2009 has been extracted as of May. Data before September 2005 are not available. Those aged 12 to 14 are not held in YOIs.
	All prisoners are asked for details of their home address on first reception to prison and on discharge from prison. About 60 per cent. of prisoners (both male and female) are shown to have given a recognised address. If no address is given, various proxies are used to determine distance from home, including next-of-kin address and committal court address.
	
		
			  Closeness to home of young offenders aged between 15-19 held in young offender institutions between 2005 and 2009 
			  Male YOIs (as of Sept ember  2005) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Ashfield 3 6 22 9 12 20 13 15 28 9 13 26 0 0 0 
			 Aylesbury n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 16 22 33 14 25 42 
			 Brinsford 50 63 81 61 66 85 52 56 86 63 70 89 64 78 90 
			 Castington 17 67 67 3 34 41 3 27 40 6 29 32 4 50 54 
			 Deerbolt n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 7 20 1 4 17 
			 Feltham 30 87 91 25 87 90 28 80 87 37 92 94 34 94 94 
			 Glen Parva n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 9 19 65 17 25 64 
			 Hindley 86 100 100 73 98 98 81 96 96 60 95 97 51 87 88 
			 Huntercombe 0 16 32 4 8 21 8 17 34 9 18 20 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Lancaster Farms 0 13 17 0 17 24 1 19 30 4 27 33 1 21 32 
			 Northallerton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 2 4 3 8 13 
			 Portland n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 9 9 12 9 9 13 
			 Reading n/a n/a n/a 100 100 100 n/a n/a n/a 28 48 57 25 42 55 
			 Rochester n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 11 34 74 16 37 66 
			 Stoke Heath 5 20 40 0 7 34 1 5 26 2 15 31 7 23 49 
			 Swinfen Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 34 45 55 33 43 56 
			 Thorn Cross 100 100 100 55 64 73 38 63 63 14 46 59 27 59 77 
			 Warren Hill 0 0 0 3 5 6 3 8 11 0 4 4 0 50 50 
			 Werrington 0 5 16 8 18 33 7 13 24 0 7 7 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Wetherby 29 43 63 26 45 58 32 48 59 22 34 48 n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	
		
			  Male YOIs (as of September 2006) 
			   Percentage of 15- year-olds held within  Percentage of 16- year-olds held within  Percentage of 17- year-olds held within  Percentage of 18 - year-olds held within  Percentage of 19 - year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Ashfield 11 11 16 10 14 26 6 7 15 5 8 28 0 0 33 
			 Aylesbury n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3 10 19 1 10 26 
			 Brinsford 63 63 74 62 67 87 63 66 82 71 81 86 70 85 91 
			 Castington 7 17 31 5 23 26 11 25 34 4 18 36 6 37 51 
			 Deerbolt n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 6 23 5 10 28 
			 Feltham 10 80 95 23 74 83 21 79 86 32 81 84 45 92 93 
			 Glen Parva n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 10 22 55 14 20 61 
			 Hindley 29 81 86 57 82 90 67 83 84 40 85 88 58 87 94 
			 Huntercombe 4 9 32 2 5 22 2 9 30 7 8 25 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Lancaster Farms 0 6 26 0 10 17 3 15 26 2 23 34 3 25 30 
			 Northallerton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 4 6 0 1 3 
			 Portland n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 2 2 2 7 
			 Reading n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 33 53 61 28 48 55 
			 Rochester n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 10 35 70 6 36 63 
			 Stoke Heath 4 12 24 3 17 31 3 10 21 3 14 34 1 14 41 
			 Swinfen Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 25 41 50 28 39 47 
			 Thorn Cross 0 50 50 27 36 36 0 47 60 30 55 65 16 36 53 
			 Warren Hill 0 10 10 0 5 7 1 8 10 0 4 13 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Werrington 0 0 7 0 0 12 3 5 14 0 11 11 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Wetherby 33 53 63 28 43 49 24 41 54 27 42 44 n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	
		
			  Male YOIs (as of September 2007) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Ashfield 15 17 27 11 14 17 7 9 16 8 10 19 0 0 100 
			 Aylesbury n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 2 7 16 1 7 21 
			 Brinsford 80 80 87 60 62 74 53 55 77 61 67 82 66 80 92 
			 Castington 8 31 54 7 33 43 4 33 41 1 38 46 4 36 55 
			 Cookham Wood n/a n/a n/a 9 18 27 0 9 27 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Deerbolt n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 7 24 4 7 23 
			 Feltham 36 73 82 44 67 69 39 74 80 53 85 87 66 97 97 
			 Glen Parva n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 10 35 57 13 39 59 
			 Hindley 38 88 94 76 91 96 63 86 89 45 85 86 50 87 90 
			 Huntercombe 0 11 37 6 13 28 2 10 25 0 5 13 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Lancaster Farms 5 29 38 2 10 20 1 25 32 2 25 34 2 22 33 
			 Northallerton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 2 2 
			 Portland n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 2 6 2 2 5 
			 Reading n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 26 39 54 18 38 53 
			 Rochester n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 10 31 69 14 40 75 
			 Stoke Heath 0 19 24 3 7 32 4 13 22 10 19 35 11 23 37 
			 Swinfen Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 24 31 44 26 32 51 
			 Thorn Cross 100 100 100 14 14 29 27 45 45 28 58 67 24 46 56 
			 Warren Hill 8 8 15 7 7 14 4 4 8 7 10 21 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Werrington 5 16 21 5 11 18 1 7 16 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Wetherby 25 31 50 17 35 54 17 29 44 16 27 36 0 100 100 
		
	
	continued
	
		
			  Male YOIs (as of September 2008) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Ashfield 15 15 18 8 12 23 10 13 17 10 10 24 0 0 0 
			 Aylesbury n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 6 31 1 9 23 
			 Brinsford 83 83 83 81 81 85 74 76 95 64 67 74 69 74 82 
			 Castington 0 8 25 0 29 32 6 25 32 5 23 31 0 33 41 
			 Cookham Wood 0 43 71 13 20 80 19 65 96 50 100 100 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Deerbolt n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3 6 21 2 5 20 
			 Feltham 67 92 92 46 82 86 58 86 89 68 97 97 68 98 98 
			 Glen Parva n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 45 58 15 45 56 
			 Hindley 71 100 100 70 95 95 68 85 87 44 84 86 52 84 88 
			 Huntercombe 3 3 12 2 5 20 3 7 21 6 12 26 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Lancaster Farms 0 14 25 0 26 36 1 13 23 4 25 40 5 21 32 
			 Northallerton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 2 5 2 6 9 
			 Portland n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 1 3 1 1 6 
			 Reading n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 39 54 62 28 40 52 
			 Rochester n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 9 29 70 8 32 76 
			 Stoke Heath 10 20 30 9 26 36 2 8 29 12 23 33 10 22 37 
			 Swinfen Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 10 20 30 24 29 45 
			 Thorn Cross n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 25 25 50 17 43 55 
			 Warren Hill 4 8 15 9 9 14 7 8 15 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Werrington 0 0 31 5 24 38 1 17 38 0 13 13 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Wetherby 23 38 51 26 37 51 23 37 51 15 38 62 n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	
		
			  Male YOIs (as of May 2009) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Ashfield 17 17 35 10 13 16 11 12 17 9 9 15 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Aylesbury n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 5 19 1 8 31 
			 Brinsford 82 82 100 56 60 72 72 77 92 61 69 83 69 74 79 
			 Castington 7 27 33 3 21 24 0 25 33 1 19 35 4 30 46 
			 Cookham Wood 25 50 50 17 33 56 21 38 55 36 50 50 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Deerbolt n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 6 22 1 4 16 
			 Feltham 52 84 92 52 90 90 57 90 93 67 96 97 69 97 97 
			 Glen Parva n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 43 67 13 40 60 
			 Hindley 63 93 96 51 81 88 46 82 92 63 94 94 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Huntercombe 4 13 25 3 7 21 3 10 23 0 7 28 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Lancaster Farms n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3 16 22 2 21 26 
			 Northallerton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 5 7 0 10 13 
			 Portland n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 1 4 1 1 4 
			 Reading n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 24 49 58 13 36 54 
			 Rochester n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 9 25 71 8 30 71 
			 Stoke Heath 0 7 21 4 11 22 3 15 29 3 13 22 9 26 39 
			 Swinfen Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 18 27 33 17 24 36 
			 Thorn Cross n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 44 50 50 30 54 63 
			 Warren Hill 0 0 12 3 3 10 7 7 11 9 9 13 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Werrington 0 13 44 9 27 42 11 25 46 0 11 17 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Wetherby 5 19 27 21 33 46 16 27 39 10 23 38 n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	continued
	
		
			  Female YOIs (as of September 2005) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Askham Grange n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 
			 Cookham Wood n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 14 57 0 100 100 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Downview n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 17 33 42 0 100 100 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Drake Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 100 100 100 33 33 33 
			 Eastwood Park n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 6 6 13 25 13 20 33 
			 Foston Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 25 75 100 
			 Holloway n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 73 73 87 55 55 75 
			 Low Newton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 67 67 67 44 78 78 
			 New Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 25 38 69 16 40 52 48 61 70 
			 Styal n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 45 55 91 36 36 57 
		
	
	
		
			  Female YOIs (as of September 2006) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Askham Grange n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 
			 Cookham Wood n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 41 47 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Downview n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 27 27 50 50 50 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Drake Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Eastwood Park n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 6 6 22 6 6 11 10 16 29 
			 Foston Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 100 0 0 33 
			 Holloway n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 47 47 50 28 37 44 
			 Low Newton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 25 25 26 47 53 
			 New Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 21 26 47 18 45 55 27 36 45 
			 Styal n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 29 43 57 40 47 80 
		
	
	
		
			  Female YOIs (as of September 2007) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Askham Grange n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 50 50 50 
			 Downview n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 50 64 79 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Drake Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 0 25 
			 Eastwood Park n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 6 12 12 18 41 
			 Foston Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 8 23 0 100 100 0 33 33 
			 Holloway n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 48 57 62 57 62 68 
			 Low Newton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 63 63 63 50 50 50 
			 New Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 14 23 32 38 77 77 25 63 75 
			 Styal n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 33 60 87 18 32 64 
		
	
	
		
			  Female YOIs (as of September 2008) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Askham Grange n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Downview n/a n/a n/a 100 100 100 53 53 73 n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 
			 Drake Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 40 40 33 33 33 
			 Eastwood Park n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 13 18 18 35 5 11 26 
			 Foston Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 27 60 33 67 100 100 100 100 
			 Holloway n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 72 76 80 39 45 61 
			 Low Newton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 20 20 20 17 33 42 
			 New Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 12 27 38 10 25 45 6 38 56 
			 Styal n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 21 36 64 55 55 64 
		
	
	
		
			  Female YOIs (as of May 2009) 
			   Percentage of 15-year-olds held within  Percentage of 16-year-olds held within  Percentage of 17-year-olds held within  Percentage of 18-year-olds held within  Percentage of 19-year-olds held within 
			   20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles  20 miles  30 miles  40 miles 
			 Askham Grange n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Downview n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 50 79 79 33 67 67 67 78 78 
			 Drake Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 11 11 44 
			 Eastwood Park n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 17 17 42 16 16 26 
			 Foston Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 11 22 67 0 100 100 n/a n/a n/a 
			 Holloway n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 55 64 64 52 57 57 
			 Low Newton n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 33 33 27 45 45 
			 New Hall n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 33 53 6 28 44 53 73 80 
			 Styal n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 11 33 61 21 46 63

Young Offenders: Self-Harm

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the answer of 1 July 2009,  Official Report, columns 265-67W, on young offender institutions: injuries, how many incidents of  (a) self-harm and  (b) assault there were in each young offender institution in 2009.

Maria Eagle: Self-harm and assault data is submitted by all establishments using the Incident Reporting System or Prison-NOMIS, where prisons have migrated to the new system. The nature of this data and the amount of it means that data can change as investigations are completed, data is revised and re-submitted. Data for 2009 is still being collated and validated. It will be published in July 2010.

Youth Custody

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people were held in each  (a) secure children's home,  (b) secure training centre and  (c) young offender institution in each year from 2002 to 2009; and what proportion of such people were aged (i) 12, (ii) 13, (iii) 14, (iv) 15, (v) 16, (vi) 17, (vii) 18 and (viii) 19 years old at the time at which they were first detained.

Maria Eagle: Table 1 details the number of young people aged 12 to 17 held in each secure children's home, secure training centre and young offender institution on 30 June in each year from 2002 to 2009. Information on the young people's ages at the time they were first detained is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	These data have been supplied by the Youth Justice Board and have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time. Differences in counting rules may mean that figures from other databases are not directly comparable.
	Apart from those completing juvenile sentences, young people aged 18 and 19 who are sent to custody are accommodated in the young adult (18 to 20) estate. Table 2 shows the total number of young people in custody aged 18 and 19 on 30 June each year from 2002 to 2009.
	Information on the population of individual young adult establishments and on the age of the young people at the time they were first detained is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	These data have been supplied by Justice Statistics Analytical Services and have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time. Differences in counting rules may mean that figures from other databases are not directly comparable.
	
		
			  Table 1: Number of 12 to 17-year- olds in custody, as at 30 June: 2002 - 09 
			  Accommodation type  Establishment  Age  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009 
			  Secure children's homes Aldine House 12 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 
			   13 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 
			   14 0 5 2 2 2 1 1 1 
			   15 2 0 0 1 2 3 2 1 
			   16 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 2 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Atkinson Unit 12 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 
			   14 8 3 2 5 2 4 2 0 
			   15 2 3 3 2 2 1 6 0 
			   16 2 6 2 2 3 3 0 2 
			   17 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Aycliffe Young People's Centre 12 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 
			   13 3 4 6 1 1 3 5 3 
			   14 11 10 8 8 9 8 7 11 
			   15 10 10 8 10 5 9 8 6 
			   16 6 7 11 9 5 8 4 5 
			   17 3 2 1 2 5 1 1 0 
			
			  Barton Moss Secure Unit 12 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 
			   13 3 0 5 2 2 3 6 4 
			   14 10 11 5 9 8 7 6 8 
			   15 2 7 6 5 7 1 4 5 
			   16 2 0 2 1 0 3 3 1 
			   17 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 
			
			  Briars Hey 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Clare Lodge 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Clayfields House 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 2 0 0 4 3 3 1 2 
			   14 4 5 5 3 5 4 6 5 
			   15 5 5 3 3 3 3 2 3 
			   16 2 5 3 2 1 0 2 2 
			   17 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 
			
			  Dales House 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Earlswood Secure Unit 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  East Moor 12 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 
			   13 4 2 4 7 5 4 6 4 
			   14 22 11 11 15 17 17 18 14 
			   15 5 13 12 7 5 7 6 9 
			   16 1 5 4 6 5 3 2 4 
			   17 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 
			
			  Gladstone House 12 1 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 
			   13 1 4 2 2 4 3 0 0 
			   14 3 3 8 4 7 3 0 0 
			   15 3 4 4 4 2 3 0 0 
			   16 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 
			   17 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 
			
			  Hillside 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 1 3 1 0 1 2 1 2 
			   14 4 1 3 5 4 5 5 2 
			   15 5 3 3 6 4 3 4 6 
			   16 3 6 6 2 4 4 1 5 
			   17 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 0 
			
			  Kyloe House 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 
			   13 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 
			   14 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 
			   15 2 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 
			   16 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 
			   17 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 
			
			  Leverton Secure Unit 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Lincolnshire Secure Unit 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 
			   13 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 
			   14 3 1 1 0 3 3 2 3 
			   15 0 4 4 4 2 2 3 3 
			   16 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 
			
			  Market Street 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Orchard Lodge 12 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 
			   13 1 1 1 4 1 5 0 0 
			   14 3 8 8 6 8 7 7 1 
			   15 6 6 7 6 6 3 6 3 
			   16 3 5 2 0 2 3 4 1 
			   17 2 2 1 2 0 0 1 0 
			
			  Red Bank Community Home 12 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 
			   13 3 3 3 1 0 3 5 1 
			   14 8 14 8 13 13 6 8 6 
			   15 8 7 12 9 4 9 9 9 
			   16 5 2 2 2 8 5 6 9 
			   17 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 
			
			  Redsands Secure Unit 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  St. Catherines Centre for Girls 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  St. John's Centre (Tiffield) 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 2 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 5 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Sutton Place 12 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 
			   13 4 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 
			   14 2 4 5 3 2 1 1 0 
			   15 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 
			   16 0 3 1 2 2 3 2 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Stamford House 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Stoke House 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Swanwick Lodge 12 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 
			   13 5 3 2 3 2 3 1 0 
			   14 1 5 3 4 2 3 8 4 
			   15 1 0 4 1 2 1 1 3 
			   16 1 0 1 1 2 0 3 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Thornbury House 12 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Vinney Green 12 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 
			   13 2 2 1 3 2 2 3 0 
			   14 4 5 7 8 8 5 10 8 
			   15 5 7 5 1 4 8 4 3 
			   16 8 6 4 6 4 4 3 6 
			   17 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 
			
			  Watling House 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Secure Training Centres Hassockfield STC 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 5 5 6 3 0 0 0 0 
			   14 21 13 10 8 12 23 16 9 
			   15 10 13 15 12 16 19 22 8 
			   16 1 9 4 11 10 14 14 13 
			   17 0 1 1 1 0 2 4 2 
			
			  Medway 12 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 
			   13 3 6 5 3 1 1 2 5 
			   14 14 25 17 17 21 21 17 13 
			   15 17 18 25 23 16 17 25 27 
			   16 6 14 23 22 20 22 18 17 
			   17 1 2 1 2 6 4 14 5 
			
			  Oakhill STC 12 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 
			   14 0 0 1 14 17 15 15 23 
			   15 0 0 0 23 20 22 8 30 
			   16 0 0 0 25 28 18 17 19 
			   17 0 0 0 1 7 2 0 4 
			
			  Rainsbrook 12 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 8 7 6 3 2 0 0 3 
			   14 28 24 20 22 22 19 20 10 
			   15 13 23 27 23 19 20 25 27 
			   16 7 22 12 24 26 32 27 36 
			   17 0 0 5 4 3 11 12 5 
			
			  Young Offender Institutions Ashfield 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 
			   15 28 16 28 23 31 47 40 24 
			   16 79 50 79 77 91 96 113 76 
			   17 119 98 150 174 177 194 205 215 
			
			  Aylesbury 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 
			
			  Brinsford 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 23 24 26 20 18 18 6 7 
			   16 59 50 67 63 63 49 40 18 
			   17 93 97 92 88 112 78 69 60 
			
			  Brockhill 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 10 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Bullwood Hall 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 27 15 20 16 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Castington 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 15 18 21 8 16 10 16 11 
			   16 61 39 33 47 34 46 45 27 
			   17 95 86 82 70 77 77 95 87 
			
			  Cookham Wood 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 22 
			   17 0 0 0 0 14 11 23 54 
			
			  Downview 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 11 15 13 14 15 
			
			  Eastwood Park 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 6 7 7 10 18 13 18 14 
			
			  Feltham 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 41 31 30 30 24 28 24 30 
			   16 75 83 76 61 74 59 63 61 
			   17 198 166 150 137 131 135 147 129 
			
			  Foston Hall 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 0 0 0 0 0 11 12 9 
			
			  Hindley 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 29 17 19 14 22 11 31 35 
			   16 63 57 34 44 52 47 57 82 
			   17 83 94 98 90 76 85 101 156 
			
			  Holloway 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 8 11 8 0 1 0 0 0 
			
			  Huntercombe 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 36 18 27 30 38 30 40 20 
			   16 83 77 92 83 96 109 98 69 
			   17 143 127 175 172 180 165 181 147 
			
			  Lancaster Farms 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 26 20 25 32 41 25 29 0 
			   16 51 41 51 65 67 74 65 0 
			   17 113 106 107 111 116 119 132 0 
			
			  Low Newton 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  New Hall 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 15 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 
			   17 23 34 39 34 23 20 25 21 
			
			  Onley 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 20 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 62 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 121 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Parc 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 1 2 1 1 6 6 2 8 
			   16 4 3 4 2 10 10 22 17 
			   17 9 14 13 13 16 35 40 38 
			
			  Portland 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Stoke Heath 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 18 10 21 21 25 25 20 13 
			   16 55 35 45 39 62 46 61 26 
			   17 101 64 107 113 90 108 118 78 
			
			  Styal 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Swinfen Hall 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			
			  Thorn Cross 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 2 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 
			   16 6 10 13 8 10 6 0 0 
			   17 21 17 16 16 4 13 1 0 
			
			  Warren Hill 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 9 20 24 23 23 20 23 20 
			   16 53 53 51 58 61 51 68 55 
			   17 100 87 108 106 109 115 112 106 
			
			  Werrington 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 16 11 13 24 15 18 15 11 
			   16 37 22 42 42 46 39 40 45 
			   17 68 59 60 63 70 63 61 74 
			
			  Wetherby 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 46 27 46 33 38 40 46 29 
			   16 85 96 76 105 77 93 93 125 
			   17 169 169 133 162 169 172 176 189 
			
			  Woodhill 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			   16 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 
			   17 0 0 3 4 4 1 1 0 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Number of young people aged 18 and 19 in custody, as at 30 June :  2002 - 09 
			  Age  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009 
			 18 2,161 2,069 2,067 2,070 2,159 2,249 2,170 2,215 
			 19 2,841 2,692 2,640 2,748 2,841 3,104 3,221 3,160

HEALTH

Blood: Contamination

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the number of infections resulting from bacterially contaminated blood transfusions in England and Wales in the last 24 months; how many of those infections resulted in fatalities; and if he will make a statement.

Gillian Merron: The following table shows the number of patients reported to have acquired a bacterial infection from transfusion of blood components in England and North Wales (the area covered by NHS Blood and Transplant) between 1 April 2008 and 31 December 2009 (20 months). Complete data for 2009-2010 are not yet available. In total, eight recipients were reported to have received a bacterial transfusion-transmitted infection, three of whom died. There are around 2.4 million transfusions in England and Wales annually.
	
		
			  Financial year  Number of infected recipients  Number of recipients experiencing major morbidity( 1)  Number of fatalities 
			 2008-09(2) 7 5 2 
			 2009-10(3) 1 0 1 
			 (1) Major morbidity is defined as any symptomatic confirmed transfusion-transmitted infection.  (2) 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009.  (3) Data available from 1 April 2009 to 31 December 2009 only.

Blood Donors

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much blood was donated in each London borough in each year since 2000.

Gillian Merron: The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is in the following table, based on numbers of donations in each of the four main London areas.
	
		
			  Blood collected in London( 1 ) and the south-east since 2000-01 
			   2009-10( 2)  2008-09  2007-08  2006-07  2005-06  2004-05  2003-04  2002-03  2001-02  2000-01  Total 
			 London North and West 54,289 55,049 51,782 52,654 61,919 62,048 67,286 61,853 55,820 51,785 574,485 
			 City and Essex 37,421 40,420 39,414 41,912 48,489 52,723 55,102 50,368 47,231 41,211 454,291 
			 London South West and Surrey 58,930 61,719 63,215 63,805 65,382 68,805 71,929 66,236 59,843 54,865 634,729 
			 London South East and North Kent 53,738 56,099 58,751 60,402 64,121 70,673 73,523 68,531 64,051 58,970 628,859 
			 Total 204,378 213,287 213,162 218,773 239,911 254,249 267,840 246,988 226,945 206,831 229,2364 
			 (1) Data are not collated centrally on the number of blood donations collected by London boroughs. (2) Figures given until 21 March 2010.  Source: NHS Blood and Transplant

Blood Donors

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much donated blood was used in each London  (a) hospital and  (b) borough in each year since 2000;
	(2)  how much donated blood each London  (a) hospital and  (b) borough had in reserve in each year since 2000;
	(3)  how much donated blood each London  (a) hospital and  (b) borough could not be used for each reason in each year since 2000.

Gillian Merron: The information is not available in the format requested. However, as soon as the available information can be produced, a copy will be placed in the Library.

Blood Donors

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much his Department has spent on advertising to encourage people to donate blood in each London borough in each year since 2000;
	(2)  how much his Department plans to spend on advertising to encourage people to donate blood in each London borough in the next five years.

Gillian Merron: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Vale of Clwyd (Chris Ruane) on 9 December 2009,  Official Report, column 467W (for years 2001-02 and 2008-09).
	Information on funds spent on marketing activities by the NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) are held for England and North Wales only and cannot be broken down by local area. NHSBT's combined budget in 2009-10 for marketing activities for blood and organ donation is £19,990,933 million(1). The provisional total budget for 2010-11 is £16,626,941. Figures for planned advertising for 2011-12 and beyond are not yet available.
	(1) The extra costs for 2009-10 were due to increased advertising needed to increase blood stock levels to 65,000 in anticipation of the flu pandemic, together with additional advertising to raise awareness of organ donation and increase the number of registrations on the organ donor register.

Blood Donors

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate has been made of the quantity of blood  (a) needed and  (b) likely to be donated in each London (i) hospital and (ii) borough in each of the next five years.

Gillian Merron: The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is in the table.
	Distribution of donated blood across England and North Wales is co-ordinated nationally. In 2009-10, the estimated requirement for red cells across England and North Wales is 1,878,000 units, increasing to 1,896,000 units in 2010-11. The NHS Blood and Transplant's (NHSBT) planning assumptions for the next three years anticipate 1 per cent. in need.
	The number of donations the National Blood Service (part of the NHSBT) is aiming to collect in London and the South East in 2009-10 and 2010-11 is shown as follows. Data for likely donations beyond 2010-11 are not yet available.
	
		
			  Area( 1)  Target 2009-10  Target 2010-11 
			 London North and West 55,376 67,339 
			 City and Essex 40,615 39,050 
			 London South East and North Kent 55,346 55,627 
			 London South West and Surrey 63,544 60,714 
			 Total 214,881 222,730 
			 (1) Data are not collated centrally on the number of blood donations likely to be needed nor collected in each London hospital or borough. Available data are shown by London area.

Cervical Cancer Screening

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of women did not receive the result of a cervical screening test within two weeks of the test taking place in the latest period for which figures are available.

Ann Keen: For period 2008-09 (the latest period for which the figures are available) 78.6 per cent. of women did not receive their cervical screening test results within two weeks. However, test results were available for 21.4 per cent. of women within two weeks compared to 11.1 per cent. in 2007-08, and 65.5 per cent. were available within four weeks compared to 59.6 per cent. in 2007-08.
	It is a Vital Sign of the 'NHS Operating Framework 2010-11', a copy of which has already been placed in the Library, that all women should receive the results of their cervical screening tests within two weeks by 2010. 10 pilot programmes have achieved 14-day turnaround times for at least 99 per cent. of tests and with significant reductions in failed tests and in resource requirements. This is now being rolled out across the country.

Community Hospitals: Finance

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much of the £750 million capital investment fund for community hospitals announced in July 2006 has been  (a) allocated and  (b) spent in respect of each hospital; and whether capital or revenue funding was allocated in each case.

Mike O'Brien: Since July 2006, the Government have allocated around £250 million in capital funding towards 28 schemes through the Community Hospitals Programme.
	The following table shows the total notional allocations made to each scheme when the programme was launched in 2006:
	
		
			  Total notional allocation 
			  Primary care trust  Scheme  £ million (rounded) 
			 Sunderland Teaching Washington Primary Care Centre 8.95 
			 Hartlepool Hartlepool Primary Care Facility 3.00 
			 Stockport St Thomas' 26.60 
			
			 Calderdale PCT Calderdale and Kirklees Community Services 13.08 
			 Kirklees PCT   
			
			 Rotherham Rotherham Primary Care Centre 0.96 
			 North Yorkshire and York Selby Health and Community Campus 13.04 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire East Riding Community Hospitals (Beverley, Hornsea and Driffield) 17.00 
			 Nottingham County Teaching Ashfield Community Hospital 1.15 
			 Worcestershire Malvern Community Hospital 19.22 
			 Suffolk Felixstowe General Hospital 1.76 
			 Haringey Hornsey Community Hospital 1.66 
			 Barking and Dagenham Barking Hospital 5.00 
			 Richmond and Twickenham Teddington Health and Social Care Centre 3.98 
			 Barnet Finchley Memorial Hospital 9.90 
			 Kensington and Chelsea St. Charles Hospital 10.50 
			 Greenwich Eltham and Mottingham Hospital 4.58 
			 Hastings and Rother Hastings Primary Health Care Centre 12.29 
			 Eastern and Coastal Kent Health and Social Care Centre at Kings Avenue, Ashford, Kent 9.00 
			 Hampshire Gosport War Memorial Hospital 6.12 
			 Southampton Royal South Hants Hospital 6.08 
			 Portsmouth City Teaching St. Mary's Community Hospital 17.10 
			 Buckinghamshire Thame 4.00 
			 South Gloucestershire Yate Community Health Centre 5.00 
			 Somerset Minehead Healthy Living Park 24.50 
			 Bristol South Bristol Community Hospital 3.90 
			 Bath and North East Somerset Keynsham Health Park 5.80 
			 Gloucestershire Berkeley Vale 6.40 
			 Gloucestershire North Cotswolds 13.20 
			 Total notional allocation - 253.77 
		
	
	We do not hold information centrally on local profiling of expenditure for community hospitals. It is for strategic health authorities to work with their primary care trusts to monitor progress and support local management on individual schemes.

Drugs and Alcoholic Drinks

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether a recent assessment has been made of the effectiveness of drug and alcohol rehabilitation services in  (a) Chorley,  (b) Lancashire and  (c) primary care trusts in the North West.

Gillian Merron: Primary care trusts (PCTs) are responsible for providing and commissioning health services to meet the health care needs of their local populations. It also for PCTs to consider the effectiveness of services commissioned. This includes the provision of drug and alcohol rehabilitation services.
	The Department and the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (NTA) provide advice, guidance and data to help PCTs better understand their local drug and alcohol service needs. Local drug commissioning partnerships are responsible for commissioning drug treatment services from national health service and voluntary sector organisations, and all partnerships will produce local drug treatment plans that set out how they plan to improve the delivery of drug treatment locally. The NTA's regional teams will monitor the performance of partnerships and the services they commission by measuring performance against locally set targets, which are set out in treatment plans.
	The NTA's north-west regional team assesses the performance of the Lancashire Drug and Alcohol Action Team, and the drug services it commissions, on an annual and ongoing basis.

Drugs and Alcoholic Drinks

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what plans he has for the future funding of drug and alcohol rehabilitation services;
	(2)  how much funding his Department made available to primary care trusts for drug and alcohol rehabilitation services in the latest period for which figures are available.

Gillian Merron: Direct central Government funding for drug treatment through the pooled treatment budget in 2010-11 is £406.7 million. In addition, an estimated £200 million is spent locally by primary care trusts on adult drug services.
	No decision has been taken regarding future Government funding for drug services.
	The cost of alcohol treatment is met through national health service mainstream expenditure according to local needs and priorities.
	Residential rehabilitation is funded by local authority social services through their Community Care Act responsibilities.
	Decisions on future funding for alcohol treatment will be made at a local level in line with local needs.

Drugs and Alcoholic Drinks

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he has made a recent assessment of the level of consistency across the country in criteria used by service providers to determine admittance to drug and alcohol treatment programmes.

Gillian Merron: Criteria for entry to drug and alcohol treatment programmes are determined at a local level between treatment providers and commissioners.
	The Department of Health, National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence have issued commissioning guidance and effectiveness reviews to assist providers and commissioners in this process.

Eyesight Testing

David Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he plans to take to encourage people to have regular sight tests.

Ann Keen: Free sight tests are available under the national health service to large parts of the population including people aged 60 and over, children under 16, those aged 16-18 in full-time education, people on benefits, those people at particular risk of developing eye disease, and people who are registered blind or partially sighted or who have a complex spectacle prescription. Sight tests allow the opportunity to review all aspects of eye health, including investigations for signs of disease. Those at risk of specific eye disease (e.g. diabetic retinopathy) may be asked to attend regular screening.
	Information about the extensive arrangements for providing help with NHS optical services and other health costs is published in leaflet HC11 Are you entitled to help with health costs? Posters are also available for display in optical practices and hospital out-patient departments. A copy of the leaflet has already been placed in the Library.
	The uptake of NHS sight tests continues to increase. In 2008-09, there were 11.3 million NHS sight tests, an increase of 2.1 per cent. on 2007-08.
	The Department is also supporting National Eye Health Week which will be held between 14 and 18 June and is aiming to promote the importance of regular sight tests.

Glaucoma: Bolton

David Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients in Bolton have been treated for glaucoma in each of the last three years.

Ann Keen: The information is not available in the format requested. The information that is available is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  A count of finished consultant episodes( 1)  where there was a primary diagnosis( 2)  of glaucoma for the Bolton Primary Care Trust (PCT) for 2006-07 to 2008-09( 3) 
			  Activity in English national health service hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector 
			   Finished consultant episodes 
			 2008-09 48 
			 2007-08 26 
			 2006-07 34 
			 (1) A finished consultant episode (FCE) is a continuous period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. FCEs are counted against the year in which they end. Figures do not represent the number of different patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the same stay in hospital or in different stays in the same year. (2) The primary diagnosis is the first of up to 20 (14 from 2002-03 to 2006-07 and seven prior to 2002-03) diagnosis fields in the HES data set and provides the main reason why the patient was admitted to hospital. The ICD-10 codes that have been used to define glaucoma are H40-Glaucoma and Q15.0 Congenital glaucoma. (3) Assessing growth through time. HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, apparent reductions in activity may be due to a number of procedures which may now be undertaken in out-patient settings and so no longer include in admitted patient HES data.  Note: HES are compiled from data sent by more than 300 NHS trusts and PCTs in England and from some independent sector organisations for activity commissioned by the English NHS. The NHS Information Centre for health and social care liaises closely with these organisations to encourage submission of complete and valid data and seeks to minimise inaccuracies. While this brings about improvement over time, some shortcomings remain.  Source: The NHS Information Centre for health and social care, Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)

Health Education

Adrian Bailey: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what steps his Department is taking to encourage people to self-care for minor ailments, with particular reference to provision of information for  (a) the general public and  (b) school children;
	(2)  what steps his Department is taking to encourage GPs to increase the number of their patients self-caring for minor ailments.

Ann Keen: Community pharmacies already support people to self care, providing advice on how to treat or manage their minor ailments and appropriate use of over-the-counter medicines. They are conveniently located on the high street, in the community and in supermarkets. The pharmacy communications programme, currently underway, aims to raise awareness of the services available from pharmacies.
	Information on self care support, including Making the most of your pharmacist is available through Your health, your way on NHS Choices. NHS Choices and NHS Direct offer facilities, such as online symptom checkers and self assessment tools, to help people understand where self care is appropriate in the treatment of minor ailments and when they should seek advice from medical professionals. NHS Choices also provides online advice about accidents to children at home and details a number of instances when children should be taken to hospital.
	A range of material about self care and personalised care planning is available for health and social care professionals. This aims to raise awareness of the choices of self care options available and how to incorporate self care into personalised care planning discussions.
	In addition, a web-based training module for clinicians and other professionals is offered through the national learning management system - Supporting Self Care was developed with the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges and DH e-learning for Healthcare. It is also available to GPs as part of their e-GP training materials.
	The Department fully supports a greater focus on self care. With proper support from the NHS and health professionals, such as GPs and pharmacists, people can take more responsibility for their own health and wellbeing.

Health Services

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether primary care trusts are required to provide funding for clinical decisions and medicines included within recommendations by the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence contained in Technology Appraisal Guidance; and under what circumstances a primary care trust may decide not to fund clinical decisions and medicines within such recommendations.

Mike O'Brien: Primary care trusts are legally required to make funding available for drugs and treatments recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of a technology appraisal within three months of NICE'S final guidance being published. Patients also have a right to receive such treatments, where clinically appropriate, under the NHS Constitution. There is a small number of technology appraisals for which this legal requirement has been waived or amended.

Health Services: Asbestos

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent progress his Department has made towards establishing a network of research practitioners for asbestos-related diseases.

Gillian Merron: The written ministerial statement my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Straw) made on 25 February,  Official Report columns 79-83WS, expressed the Government's determination to expand research in the area of asbestos related disease.
	Our first priority is to take steps to build research capacity, particularly in mesothelioma research. The Department will work to that end with the British Lung Foundation and others with a particular interest. The initiative will be supported by a donation of £3 million from the Association of British Insurers.
	The National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) has a central role to play in maintaining strategic oversight of cancer research in the United Kingdom. The institute reported in 2006 on the state of lung cancer research. I believe the time is right for the institute to undertake a fresh review of mesothelioma research. I will write to Sir Kenneth Caiman, the Chair of the Institute, asking him to initiate such a review, and to report on its findings by the end of the summer.
	The mesothelioma sub-group of the NCRI's lung cancer clinical studies group has an important role in the development of clinical trials. We will ensure the contribution the sub-group has to make is maximised.
	The outcome of the NCRI review and other developments will underpin the future strategies and work of the Institute's partner funders, and will help develop the potential to drive an increase in research investment in mesothelioma and other asbestos related
	disease research, and will inform the Government's longer term approach. Progress on all this will be reported in the autumn.

Health Services: Devon

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what funding his Department allocated to health authorities in Devon (a) in total and  (b) per head of population for 1995-96;
	(2)  what funding his Department allocated to health authorities in England  (a) in total and  (b) per head of population for 1995-96.

Mike O'Brien: In 1995-96, revenue allocations for Devon were within the allocation for South Western Regional Health Authority. Revenue allocations in 1995-96 for South Western Regional Health Authority and the total for England are given in the following table, along with the allocation per head.
	
		
			   1995-96 
			   Allocation  (£ million)  Per-head allocation (£) 
			 South Western Regional Health Authority 2,953,543 450 
			 England 23,023,897 471 
			  Note: Prior to 1996-97, revenue allocations were made to Regional Health Authorities.  Source: Financial Planning and Allocations Division, Department of Health

Health Services: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to his Department's first stage report on Delivering healthcare for London: an integrated strategic plan 2010-2015, what NHS sites in London are classified as  (a) unoccupied and  (b) under-utilised for each reason; and to what extent each site is under-utilised.

Mike O'Brien: The report Delivering Healthcare for London-An Integrated Strategic Plan 2010-2015 is a NHS London report, not Department of Health.
	Information is not available in the format requested. Since 2000-01, the Department has collected annual data on internal floor areas from national health service trusts through the Estates Returns Information Collection (ERIC). Data collection on each NHS organisation's gross internal floor area and unoccupied internal floor area first began in 2000-01, with non-patient occupied floor area beginning in 2002-03.
	The information provided has been supplied by the NHS and has not been amended centrally. The accuracy and completeness of the information is the responsibility of the provider organisation.

Health Visitors: South West

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many health visitors have been employed in each primary care trust in the South West in each year since 1997.

Ann Keen: The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is in the following table.
	
		
			  NHS hospital and community health services: Qualified health visiting staff in the South West Strategic Health Authority (SHA) area by organisation as at 30 September each year 
			  Headcount 
			   2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 
			 South West SHA area 1,241 1,232 1,301 1,275 1,146 1,137 1,117 
			 
			 Bath and North East Somerset Primary Care Trust (PCT) 54 52 54 51 49 46 43 
			 Bournemouth and Poole PCT 92 60 78 88 83 73 78 
			 Bristol Teaching PCT 65 89 151 138 134 122 123 
			 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly PCT 108 110 108 114 110 107 109 
			 Devon PCT 144 137 132 131 138 125 116 
			 Dorset PCT 100 141 105 115 97 91 89 
			 Gloucestershire PCT 176 154 161 152 80 129 134 
			 North Somerset PCT 40 36 37 39 38 38 39 
			 Plymouth Teaching PCT 78 88 87 81 67 '65 70 
			 Somerset PCT 106 55 106 133 125 112 101 
			 South Gloucestershire PCT 57 83 71 45 46 55 52 
			 Swindon PCT 47 52 47 39 46 43 35 
			 Torbay Care Trust 29 29 30 29 28 26 26 
			 Wiltshire PCT 132 132 121 111 97 95 96 
			  Notes: 1. South West SHA area total includes a small number of staff who are employed by NHS trusts. 2. It is not possible to map accurate work force figures for these organisations prior to the formation of the PCTs in 2002. 3. The drop in numbers for Gloucestershire PCT in 2006 seems to be due to a local coding issue. It appears that around 50 health visitors were coded as district nurses in 2006, then recoded as Health Visitors in 2007. 4. Data Quality: The NHS Information Centre for health and social care seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data but responsibility for data accuracy lies with the organisations providing the data. Methods are continually being updated to improve data quality where changes impact on figures already published. This is assessed but unless it is significant at national level figures are not changed. Impact at detailed or local level is footnoted in relevant analyses.  Source: The NHS Information Centre for health and social care Non-Medical Workforce Census.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Clive Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the  (a) out patient and  (b) in patient waiting time was for each hospital in Sheffield for each speciality in each year since 1998.

Mike O'Brien: The information is not available in the format requested. The information that is available has been placed in the Library.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will place in the Library a copy of the latest Referral to Treatment Time data for  (a) Eddisbury constituency,  (b) the North West and  (c) England.

Mike O'Brien: This information requested is contained in 18 Weeks Referral to Treatment Data January 2010-Central and Eastern Cheshire, North West and England which has been placed in the Library.

Malnutrition: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in each age group were treated for malnutrition in each London borough in each year since 2000.

Mike O'Brien: Information is not held by the format requested. The following table provides a count of admissions where there was a primary diagnosis of malnutrition for patients who were treated within London strategic health authority by selected age groups.
	
		
			  Count of admissions( 1)  to hospital where there was a primary diagnosis( 2)  of malnutrition( 3)  by selected age groups for patients who were treated within London strategic health authority( 4)  from 2000-01 to 2008-09-Activity in English NHS hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector 
			   Total  0-24 years  25-49 years  50-74 years  75+ years  Unknown 
			 2008-09 50 6 13 17 13 1 
			 2007-08 52 8 19 18 7 0 
			 2006-07 45 8 9 19 9 0 
			 2005-06 44 * * 15 16 0 
			 2004-05 45 * 12 20 * 0 
			 2003-04 42 7 16 10 9 0 
			 2002-03 48 12 9 17 9 1 
			 2001-02 47 9 * 20 13 * 
			 2000-01 39 9 9 13 8 0 
			 (1) Finished admission episodes A finished admission episode (FAE) is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. FAEs are counted against the year in which the admission episode finishes. Admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year.  (2) Primary diagnosis The primary diagnosis is the first of up to 20 (14 from 2002-03 to 2006-07 and seven prior to 2002-03) diagnosis fields in the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data set and provides the main reason why the patient was admitted to hospital.  (3) ICD10 Clinical Codes The ICD-10 codes for malnutrition are: E40.X Kwashiorkor E41.X Nutritional marasmus.  (4) SHA of treatment This field is derived from the hospital provider code (procode). It indicates the strategic health authority (SHA) area within which the treatment took place.   Notes:  1.  Small numbers To protect patient confidentiality, figures between 1 and 5 have been replaced with * (an asterisk). Where it was still possible to identify numbers from the total an additional number.  2.  Data quality HES are compiled from data sent by more than 300 NHS trusts and primary care trusts PCTs in England and from some independent sector organisations for activity commissioned by the English NHS. The NHS Information Centre for health and social care liaises closely with these organisations to encourage submission of complete and valid data and seeks to minimise inaccuracies. While this brings about improvement over time, some shortcomings remain.  3.  Assessing growth through time HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, apparent reductions in activity may be due to a number of procedures which may now be undertaken in out-patient settings and so no longer include in admitted patient HES data.   Source:  Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The NHS Information Centre for health and social care.

Malnutrition: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  if he will estimate the cost to the NHS of treating malnutrition in each London borough in each year since 2000;
	(2)  whether he has made a recent estimate of the cost per bed day of treating a patient with malnutrition in each London borough.

Mike O'Brien: The information requested is not held centrally.

Medical Records: Children

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 15 March 2010,  Official Report, column 641W, on medical records: children, when he expects to reach decisions on changes to the opt-out policy in respect of children's summary care records.

Mike O'Brien: This is a complex matter on which the National Information Governance Board is considering advice. Officials are providing advice as a matter of urgency.

Medical Treatments

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects to publish his Department's response to its consultation on the proposed transfer of responsibility for commissioning ultra-orphan treatments from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence to the National Specialised Commissioning Group.

Mike O'Brien: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) provides advice to the national health service on promoting good health and preventing and treating ill health. NICE does not commission services.
	The Department published its response to the consultation Strengthening National Commissioning on 19 March 2010. The document can be found on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Consultations/Responsestoconsultations/DH_114298
	A copy has been placed in the Library.
	We are now working with the National Specialised Commissioning Team to set up the new advisory group and appoint its members. We intend that the new group will become operational in time to begin commissioning services from April 2011.
	The National Specialised Commissioning Group will not have a role in deciding what services are commissioned nationally. It will concentrate on regional and supra-regionally commissioned services.

Mesothelioma

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects his Department to provide updated leaflets with information for those with mesothelioma.

Ann Keen: Information for people with mesothelioma is available from the British Lung Foundation, the Department for Work and Pensions, and other sources. Information leaflets for clinicians and for the general public about the health implications of pleural plaques have been commissioned from, respectively, the British Thoracic Society and the British Lung Foundation. We understand that these leaflets will be published in the near future.

Neuromuscular Services: West Midlands

David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many whole time equivalent consultant neurologists with a specialism in neuromuscular conditions are employed in the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority area;
	(2)  how many whole time equivalent consultant paediatric neurologists with specialism in neuromuscular conditions are employed in the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority area.

Ann Keen: This information is not collected centrally. However, this information may be available directly from West Midlands Strategic Health Authority.

Northwick Park Hospital: Manpower

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) managers,  (b) nursing staff,  (c) junior doctors and  (d) consultants are employed at Northwick Park Hospital.

Ann Keen: Data is not available in the format requested. Data is collected by trust and is shown in the following table.
	Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS): medical, dental and non-medical staff within North West London Hospitals NHS Trust
	
		
			  As at 30 September 2008  Number 
			 HCHS Doctors of which: 698 
			 Consultant 208 
			 Doctors in training and equivalents(1) 430 
			   
			 Professionally qualified clinical staff 2,731 
			 Qualified nursing, midwifery and health visiting staff 2,006 
			 Qualified scientific, therapeutic and technical staff (ST and T) 725 
			 Qualified Allied Health Professions 332 
			 Qualified Healthcare Scientists 220 
			 Other Qualified Scientific, therapeutic and technical staff 173 
			   
			 Support to clinical staff 1,260 
			 Support to doctors and nursing staff 1,050 
			 Support to ST and T staff 210 
			   
			 NHS infrastructure support 400 
			 Central functions 236 
			 Hotel, property and estates 77 
			 Managers and senior managers 87 
			 (1) Doctors in training and equivalents (previously known as junior doctors) is the term used to refer to people in the registrar group, senior house officers, house officers and other staff in equivalent grades who are not in an educationally approved post. (2) The NHS Information Centre for health and social care seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data but responsibility for data accuracy lies with the organisations providing the data. Methods are continually being updated to improve data quality. Where changes impact on figures already published, this is assessed but unless it is significant at national level figures are not changed. Impact at detailed or local level is footnoted in relevant analyses.  Source:  The NHS Information Centre for health and social care Medical and Dental Workforce Census.

Primary Care Trusts: Finance

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 12 March 2010,  Official Report, column 574WA, on NHS finances, for what reason primary care trusts are being asked to ensure that two per cent. of their funding is committed non-recurrently.

Mike O'Brien: The NHS Operating Framework for 2010-11 stated that strategic health authorities must ensure that primary care trusts do not recurrently commit the totality of their recurrent funding in their 2010-11 plans, such that at least 2 per cent. of recurrent funding at the aggregate regional level is only ever committed non-recurrently.
	The reason primary care trusts need to do this is to ensure that they have flexibility in their spending plans to provide the capability to manage risk and volatility.

Primary Care Trusts: Information Officers

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) communications and  (b) press officers are employed by each primary care trust (PCT); and how many of each group have been so employed by each PCT in each of the last five years.

Ann Keen: The Department does not hold this information. The number of staff employed in communications and public relations activity is a matter that is determined locally (at PCT level) based on local communications need.

Tuberculosis

Doug Naysmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department is taking to encourage health services in areas with a high number of tuberculosis cases to co-ordinate their work with other public services used by those at a high risk of contracting that disease.

Gillian Merron: In June 2007, the Department published a toolkit in to help the national health service to implement the key points of the Chief Medical Officer's Action 'Plan Stopping Tuberculosis in England' (October 2004) through effective commissioning and delivery of services. A copy of the plan has already been placed in the Library. This recommended a comprehensive approach to commissioning to include a wide range of stakeholders including community services used by those at high risk (and those being treated for Tuberculosis) and through development of locally targeted health promotion and awareness raising.
	TB Alert are funded by the Department to help local primary care trusts develop targeted awareness raising, much of this to be delivered through partnerships with other local services working with risk groups.

BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Broadband

Lembit �pik: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills if his Department will take steps to ensure that broadband service providers notify their customers of traffic management arrangements applied.

Stephen Timms: Consumers need to be properly informed about the services they are paying for and it is incumbent upon service providers to make this clear to their customers. Section 27(f) of Ofcom's voluntary Code of Practice for broadband speeds calls for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to:
	explain to the consumer in a clear and meaningful way that the actual throughput speed [...] experienced by a consumer will be influenced by a number of factors including the ISP's network capacity, the ISP's traffic shaping and management policy, the number of subscribers online at any one time, by time of day etc..
	It is important that such information is made available by all providers. Changes to the European electronic communications framework directives which were agreed at the end of 2009 require:
	undertakings providing public electronic communications networks and/or publicly available electronic communications sendees to [...] provide information on any procedures put in place by the provider to measure and shape traffic so as to avoid filling or overfilling a network link, and on how those procedures could impact on sendee quality (Citizen's Rights amending directive article 21.3 (d)).
	This Department will be bringing forward secondary legislation to implement these changes in the UK by 25 May 2011 and will consult fully on the changes over the summer.

Business: Government Assistance

Robert Syms: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what funds have been disbursed under the Enterprise Finance Guarantee Scheme to date.

Rosie Winterton: Since the Enterprise Finance Guarantee (EFG) became operational in January 2009 banks have offered loans totalling nearly £850.7 million to 8,378 businesses. It is then up to each SME to decide how much of their offered loans they wish to utilise, i.e. 'draw down'. To date, nearly 7,000 SMEs have drawn down £700.1 million of EFG-backed bank loans.

Departmental Buildings

Philip Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how many smoking shelters have been built for his Department's staff since it was established; and at what cost.

Pat McFadden: This Department has not built any smoking shelters for its staff since it was established.

Departmental Telephone Services

Mark Oaten: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what public information helplines his Department runs; and what contracts have been awarded by his Department for running them.

Pat McFadden: The Department holds central information on six public information helplines. These are listed in the following table with the contract arrangements that are in place.
	
		
			  Helpline  Telephone number(s)  Contract arrangements 
			 BIS Publication Orderline 0845 015 0010 0845 015 0020 0845 015 0030 BIS has a contract with EC Group to manage requests for publication services. 
			 Business Link 0845 600 9006 BIS has a contract with BT for the main contact number that routes callers automatically to their local Business Link office. 
			 Pay and Work Rights 0800 917 2368 This service includes the former BIS helplines for National Minimum Wage and Employment Agency Standards. BIS provides funding for the Pay and Work Rights Helpline which is a COI managed framework contract delivered by BSS. 
			 Queens Award Office 020 7215 6880 The service is managed in-house. 
			 BIS Export Control Organisation 020 7215 4594 The service is managed in-house. 
			 BIS Import Licensing Branch 01642 364 333 The service is managed in-house.

Educational Institutions: Finance

David Drew: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what assessment he has made of the effects on the economy of the funding settlement for land-based education colleges for 2009-10; for what reasons the settlement for such colleges is lower than the equivalent settlement in 2008-09; and what plans he has for the level of funding for such colleges in the next five years.

Kevin Brennan: The Department routes funding through the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) for the provision of further education (FE) and skills training for adult learners aged 19 and over, including those attending the 16 specialist land-based colleges in England.
	In the 2008/09 academic year the LSC allocated £23,377,000 to specialist land-based colleges to deliver Adult Learner Responsive provision (ALR) and £22,684,000 for 2009/10. Although the allocations for five land-based colleges increased, there was an overall decrease in ALR allocation between 2008/09 and 2009/10. Across the FE and skills sector there was a decrease in ALR funding that reflected a commitment to increase funding for Train to Gain and Apprenticeships and away from Developmental Learning. Development Learning is defined as provision that is not aligned to one of the priority qualification categories: these are Full Level 2 (equivalent to 5 GCSEs at A*-C), Full Level 3 (2 A Levels or equivalent), Level 4, Foundation Learning and Skills for Life.
	Funding allocations for 2010/11 academic year have not yet been finalised but final allocation letters are due to be sent to FE Colleges and Training Organisations from the end of March. The scale of future settlements is dependent on the outcome of the ongoing comprehensive spending review.

General Agreement on Trade in Services: EU Action

Paul Holmes: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what recent discussions his Department has had with the European Commission Directorate-General of Trade on the inclusion of Mode 4 provision in EU trade agreements.

Ian Lucas: The European Commission negotiates on behalf of member states on all trade in services issues, including Mode 4, at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and in negotiations to establish in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs).
	The Commission regularly consults member states on the content of relevant trade in services negotiations, including on Mode 4.
	Formally, this consultation takes place via the Trade Policy Committee (TPC), especially the TPC (Services and Investment) which generally meets fortnightly and which is attended by officials from my Department.

Higher Education: Admissions

Justine Greening: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how much funding was allocated by the Learning and Skills Council for development projects at each higher education establishment in London for  (a) 2008-09,  (b) 2009-10 and  (c) 2010-11; and how much of that funding has been received by each establishment.

Kevin Brennan: No funding has been allocated by the Learning and Skills Council for development projects at any higher education establishment in London for the period 2008-11.

Higher Education: Finance

Justine Greening: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills which higher education establishments in  (a) London and  (b) England have been assessed as in financial difficulty consequent on approved funding bids from the Learning and Skills Council not proceeding; what assessment has been made of the development costs written off by each higher education establishment in (i) London and (ii) England in respect of those bids; which of those establishments have received financial assistance from the Learning and Skills Council; and what the monetary value is of the assistance provided to each such establishment.

Kevin Brennan: The Learning and Skills Council has not approved any capital project funding bids from higher education establishments in the last five years either on an in principle or a detailed basis and has, therefore, made no such assessments nor offered such financial assistance.

Internet

Lembit �pik: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills if his Department will bring forward proposals to ensure that internet protocol throughput is not subject to traffic management measures; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: There are several legitimate reasons why a network provider may need to introduce traffic management measures, particularly in order to avoid network congestion; ensure delivery of e-mail services or to avoid poor performance. There is currently no evidence that network providers in the UK are using traffic management in illegitimate ways.
	The legitimate uses of traffic management are recognised by the new provision in Article 22 of the Universal Services Directive which addresses Quality of Service issues. Article 22.3 states that:
	In order to prevent the degradation of service and the hindering or slowing down of traffic over networks, Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities are able to set minimum quality of service requirements on an undertaking or undertakings providing public communications networks.
	Recital 34 suggests that such measures
	should be subject to scrutiny by the national regulatory authorities, [...], in order to ensure that they do not restrict competition
	This Department is currently working on implementing this and related provisions, and will be consulting in due course.

Manganese Bronze

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills whether his Department has had discussions with representatives of Manganese Bronze in Coventry on its decision to transfer the manufacture of key components to China.

Ian Lucas: The Department has regular meetings with LTI Ltd. (as part of Manganese Bronze Holdings plc) on a range of issues.

Manganese Bronze

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what financial assistance his Department provided to Manganese Bronze between 2007 and 2009.

Ian Lucas: LTI Ltd., as part of Manganese Bronze Holdings plc, has participated in the Vehicle Scrappage Scheme which was launched in May 2009.
	On 17 March 2010, Manganese Bronze stated that 223 vehicles were sold under the scheme in 2009-which equates to Government support of £223,000.

Manganese Bronze

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will meet representatives of Manganese Bronze to discuss the future of the company's manufacturing operations in Coventry.

Ian Lucas: The Department has regular meetings with LTI Ltd. (as part of Manganese Bronze Holdings plc) on a range of issues including manufacturing at Coventry.

Post Offices: National Lottery

Nigel Evans: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the effect on sub-post offices of the National Lottery Commission's proposal to permit lottery terminals to provide  (a) bill payments,  (b) mobile telephone top-ups and  (c) other commercial services;
	(2)  what estimate he has made of the likely change in bill payment income for sub-post offices as a result of the National Lottery Commission's proposal to permit lottery terminals to provide commercial services.

Pat McFadden: holding answer 18 March 2010
	Camelot's proposal to provide commercial services through lottery terminals is still subject to the regulatory approval of the National Lottery Commission. If the commission consents to Camelot's proposal, Post Office Limited will carry out an assessment of the impact on sub post offices.

Qualifications and Curriculum Framework: Finance

David Laws: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills pursuant to the answer of 9 February 2010,  Official Report, column 902W, on the Qualifications and Curriculum Framework: finance, whether planned expenditure by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and the Skills Funding Agency on the Qualifications and Curriculum Framework (QCF) includes the estimated £40 million for IT costs in the LSC QCF Business Change Strategy referred to in footnote 2 of the paper prepared for the LSC National Council meeting on 10 September 2008, number LSC 52/2008; and if he will make a statement.

Kevin Brennan: The figure of £40 million referred to in the LSC document was an estimate of costs. Subsequent consideration led to a much-reduced figure such that actual spend on IT-related business change for the QCF was £0.47 million in 2008-09, and is expected to be around £2.14 million in 2009-10. These figures were included in the table given in my previous answer.

Radio Frequencies

John Mann: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills if his Department will take steps to protect the high frequency spectrum for use in long-range communications from power line technology devices.

Stephen Timms: The Department for Business innovation and Skills (BIS) and the Office of Communications (Ofcom) are aware of this long-standing area of concern. Ofcom is responsible for the UK management of the radio spectrum. Ofcom has commissioned an independent study into the likelihood and extent of radio frequency interference caused by Power Line Technology apparatus. This study is virtually complete and is expected to be published next month. BIS and Ofcom will then review any action that might be necessary based on this report.

World War II: Lapel Badges

Ian Davidson: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how many representations he has received on a proposed lapel badge for those who were conscripted to work in munitions factories in the Second World War; and if he will make a statement.

Pat McFadden: Government truly value the important wartime contributions and sacrifices made by all civilian workers.
	The Department has received 23 representations over the last two years seeking formal recognition for civilian workers during world war two.
	Careful consideration has been given to this issue. However, there are no present plans to introduce a lapel badge.

Written Questions: Government Responses

David Amess: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills when he plans to answer question  (a) 321887 on his Department's initiatives and  (b) 321888 on the Enterprise Finance Guarantee Scheme, tabled on 10 March 2010; and if he will make a statement.

Rosie Winterton: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 23 March,  Official Report, column 256W, and the answer I gave on 24 March,  Official Report, column 401W.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Developing Countries: Tuberculosis

Doug Naysmith: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what plans his Department has to improve the mechanisms used to measure the progress and effectiveness of the tuberculosis control programmes funded by his Department.

Gareth Thomas: The Department for International Development (DFID) aims to ensure that all organisations supported by UK aid have robust systems to monitor and measure their impact. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria (GFATM) reports regularly against targets and continually analyses how their monitoring and reporting systems can be improved. DFID is providing £6 billion to strengthen health systems in developing counties from 2008-15. A significant portion of this funding is being used to develop health information management systems that will assist in measuring the progress and effectiveness of tuberculosis control programmes.
	Many tuberculosis control programmes have reported 80 per cent. cure rates using the Directly Observed Therapy, Short-course (DOTS) monitoring system. DOTS is an effective strategy supported by the World Health Organisation and used by many programmes supported by DFID to monitor their success.

International Assistance

Phyllis Starkey: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to the answer of 5 March 2010,  Official Report, column 1416W, on international assistance, if he will publish his Department's Health Portfolio Review.

Gareth Thomas: The Department for International Development's (DFID's) health portfolio review will be published later this year and will be available at
	www.dfid.gov.uk

TREASURY

Departmental Official Hospitality

Philip Hammond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the five most expensive hospitality events hosted by his Department and its agencies were in the last three years; and what the  (a) cost and  (b) purpose was of each.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry: HM Treasury's accounting system does not identify spending by event and the information for HM Treasury and the Office of Government Commerce could not be provided within the disproportionate costs threshold.
	The Debt Management Office held just one official hospitality event in the past three years to mark the 10th anniversary of the organisation at a cost of £9,000.

Maternity Benefits

Maria Miller: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the rate of take-up is of the health in pregnancy grant in each local authority.

Stephen Timms: The 'Health in Pregnancy Grant' is a one-off, tax-free payment from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) for mothers-to-be who are at least 25 weeks pregnant to help them prepare for the birth of their baby. Further information is available at:
	http://campaigns2.direct.gov.uk/money4mum2be/en/
	The information requested is available only at disproportionate cost, due to the complexity of estimating the overall number of mothers-to-be who are eligible for the Health in Pregnancy Grant.

Royal Bank of Scotland: Loans

Willie Rennie: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent discussions officials of UK Financial Investments Ltd have had with representatives of the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) on the level of lending by RBS to small businesses.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Both HM Treasury and UK Financial investments officials hold frequent discussions with the Royal Bank of Scotland on a range of topics. As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government's practice to provide details of such discussions.

Smuggling: Alcoholic Drinks

Mark Todd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what research his Department has  (a) commissioned and  (b) evaluated on the prevalence of alcohol diversion fraud; and whether he has plans to take steps to reduce the incidence of such fraud.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Diversion of alcohol without payment of excise duty is the most prevalent form of alcohol fraud. Estimates of tax losses are produced by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) annually for spirits, the latest of which are published in 'Measuring Tax Gaps-2009'. This publication is available in the House of Commons Library. Reliable estimates for wine and beer are not yet available.
	In Budget 2009, the Chancellor announced a comprehensive programme of work for 2009-10 involving HMRC and UK Border Agency renewing their strategy to tackle alcohol fraud. The strategy comprises measures to prevent fraud as well as tackle evasion and criminality, and has three broad themes:
	Changing the law-to make life tougher for criminals and easier for honest businesses;
	Working with honest businesses-to secure legitimate supply chains and make it harder for criminals to source alcohol; and
	Strengthening operational response-to co-ordinate efforts to detect, disrupt and dismantle organised criminal networks and illicit supply chains.
	HMRC is currently in the process of implementing this strategy.

Taxation: Car Washes

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the  (a) value added tax,  (b) corporation tax and  (c) income tax revenue foregone as a result of illegal car washing operations in each of the last three years.

Stephen Timms: HM Revenue and Customs conducts inquires each year into many thousands of people operating in the hidden economy, including in car washing and valeting services. However, no assessment has been made of the tax losses from this sector above.

Welfare Tax Credits: Overpayments

Steve Webb: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the monetary value was of tax credits overpayments written off in  (a) 2005-06,  (b) 2006-07,  (c) 2007-08 and  (d) 2008-09 as a result of (i) official and (ii) claimant error; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: HM Revenue and Customs' (HMRC) Code of Practice 26 'What happens if we've paid you too much tax credit?' explains its approach to tax credits overpayments and the circumstances in which customers may not have to pay them back. It is available at:
	http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/leaflets/cop26.pdf
	(i) Information about the value of disputed tax credits overpayments written off in each year from 2005-06 to 2008-09 is in the table:
	
		
			   Value of disputed written overpayments written off (£000) 
			 2005-06 180,016 
			 2006-07 9,042 
			 2007-08 7,276 
			 2008-09 28,242 
		
	
	(ii) HMRC does not record the value of overpayments written off as a result of claimant error.

CABINET OFFICE

Business: Berkshire

Rob Wilson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what estimate has been made of the number of small businesses which have closed in  (a) Reading East constituency and  (b) Berkshire in each year since 1997.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question concerning how many small businesses have closed in  (a) Reading East constituency and  (b) Berkshire in each year since 1997.
	Annual statistics on business births, deaths and survival are available for 2002 onwards from the ONS release on Business Demography at
	www.statistics.gov.uk
	The table below contains the latest statistics available on business deaths for Reading East and Berkshire.
	
		
			  Deaths of enterprises for Reading east parliamentary constituency and the former county of Berkshire for enterprises with less than 50  e mployment (small) 
			   2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 
			 Reading East (1)- (1)- (1)- 528 523 496 507 
			 Former County of Berkshire 3,770 4,212 4,121 3,778 3,621 3,609 3,570 
			 Bracknell Forest UA 445 489 509 480 459 385 434 
			 Reading UA 710 701 647 630 650 595 628 
			 Slough UA 485 476 507 397 401 400 381 
			 West Berkshire UA 700 810 830 722 706 751 762 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead UA 775 989 848 811 708 788 760 
			 (1) Data not available  Notes: 1. The former county of Berkshire is the area now covered by the Unitary Authorities of Bracknell Forest, Reading, Slough, West Berkshire, Windsor and Maidenhead and Wokingham, all created on 1 April 1998. 2. A small business is defined as an enterprise with less than 50 employment

Census

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what the schedule is for printing 2011 Census forms; and how many Census forms she expects to be printed in each month from March 2011 to the date of the Census.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As the Director General for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) I have been asked to reply to your recent question asking what the schedule is for printing 2011 Census forms; and how many census forms are expected to be printed in each month from March 2010 to the date of the census. (323448)
	Initial printing of the questionnaires is running from March 2010 to July 2010 and once this is complete a second process of overprinting will begin, during which the barcodes, unique identifiers and internet access codes will be printed onto each questionnaire.
	Current expectations are that for the initial printing stage the numbers of questionnaires printed each month will be approximately:
	
		
			   Million 
			 March 2010 8 
			 April 2010 9 
			 May 2010 9 
			 June 2010 10 
			 July 2010 3 
		
	
	During August 2010 ONS will be undertaking testing processes and undertaking further quality assurance of the processing procedures.
	Once the initial printing process is complete a second process of overprinting will begin, during which the barcodes, unique identifiers and internet access codes will be printed onto each questionnaire. This process will run from July 2010 until March 2011.

Census

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what methodology will be used to count  (a) people in immigration removal centres and  (b) asylum seekers in the 2011 Census.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As the Director General for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) I have been asked to reply to your recent question asking what methodology will be used to count (a) people in immigration removal centres and (b) asylum seekers in the 2011 Census. (323453)
	ONS will count those people in immigration removal centres in the same manner as it will count people in prison. ONS have liaised with the Ministry of Justice to develop procedures for enumerating prisoners, and are currently in discussion with the UK Borders Agency to extend this planning to cover immigration removal centres.
	Specially trained field staff will visit such establishments and work with the management to ensure that census returns are made in respect of all inmates. Three prisons were included in the 2009 Census Rehearsal to ensure that plans for the 2011 Census are effective and practical.
	Where asylum seekers are living in the community, Census field staff will not know whether or not they are asylum seekers, and the census questionnaire will not seek this information. Such people will be enumerated via a combination of special enumeration and general enumeration procedures dependent on their length of intended residence and their place of residence. Both language support and translation services will be available. In addition, field staff will have received specific training in how to best encourage people to complete a questionnaire and deal with refusals. There will also be a tailored publicity and communications strategy to accompany this.

Census

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office pursuant to the answer to the right hon. Member for Horsham of 1 March 2010,  Official Report, column 987W, on Census, 
	(1)  what the quantified discounted benefit is of the additional questions contained in the 2011 Census;
	(2)  what the quantified discounted benefit was of the  (a) 1991 and  (b) 2011 Census exercises in real terms, adjusting for inflation and population growth.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As the Director General for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) I have been asked to reply to your recent questions asking, pursuant to the Answer to the Rt. Hon. Member for Horsham of 1 March 2010, Official Report, column 987W, on Census, what the quantified discounted benefit is of the additional questions contained in the 2011 Census, (323568); and pursuant to the Answer to the Rt. Hon. Member for Horsham of 1 March 2010, Official Report, column 987W on Census, what the quantified discounted benefit was of the (a) 1991 and (b) 2011 Census exercises in real terms, adjusting for inflation and population growth. (323569)
	The quantified discounted benefit has only been calculated for the 2011 Census programme as a whole, specific figures for the net increase of 6 individual questions per person (with no increase in household questions), have not been calculated in financial terms. However, the uses of each question have been extensively explored and well documented. Reports into the development and the uses of the questions for the 2011 Census are available to download on the ONS website.
	http://www.ons.gov.uk/census/2011-census/2011-census-questionnaire-content/question-and-content-recommendations-for-2011/index.html
	As explained in the previous answer referred to in your question, the quantified discounted benefit for the 2011 Census has been estimated to be circa £750 million, however these benefits only relate to an estimated half of the uses of census data of which ONS is aware and so this figure is considered to be a very significant under-estimate.
	This is the first time that quantified, discounted benefits have been calculated for a census therefore no figures exist for the 1991 or 2001 Censuses.

Census

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office over what geographic area the estimated £482 million expenditure on the 2011 Census is to be incurred.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As the Director General for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) I have been asked to reply to your recent question asking over what geographic area the estimated £482 million expenditure on the 2011 Census is to be incurred. (324022)
	This figure is the cost estimated by ONS to cover the undertaking of the 2011 Census in England and Wales.

Deaths: Malnutrition

Justine Greening: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office 
	(1)  how many deaths attributed to a malnutrition-related condition there were of people in each age group in each London borough in each year since 2000;
	(2)  how many deaths of people resident in  (a) private and  (b) public care homes who had a malnutrition-related condition there were in each London borough in each year since 2000.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your recent questions asking:
	1. How many deaths attributed to a malnutrition-related condition there were of people in each age group in each London borough in each year since 2000 (323786)
	2. How many deaths of people resident in (a) private and (b) public care homes who had a malnutrition-related condition there were in each London borough in each year since 2000 (323787).
	Internationally accepted guidance from the World Health Organisation requires only those conditions that contributed directly to death to be recorded on the death certificate. Medical practitioners and coroners are not supposed to record all of the diseases or conditions present at or before death. Whether a condition contributed is a matter for their clinical judgement.
	There is no official definition of a 'malnutrition-related condition'. The tables attached provide the number of deaths where:
	1. Malnutrition was the underlying cause of death, by broad age group, in each London borough, in the years 2000 to 2008 (the latest year available) combined (Table 1).
	2. Malnutrition or effects of hunger were mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, either as the underlying cause or as a contributory factor, by broad age group, in each London borough, in the years 2000 to 2008 combined (Table 2). Figures in Table 2 include those in Table 1.
	3. Malnutrition or effects of hunger were mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, either as the underlying cause or as a contributory factor, in (a) private care homes and (b) public care homes in the London government office region, in each year from 2000 to 2008 (Table 3).
	There were (a) two deaths in private care homes and (b) one death in a public care home where malnutrition was the underlying cause of death, in the London government office region, in the years 2000 to 2008 combined.(1,2,3,4)
	More detailed breakdowns of the figures provided would include extremely small numbers of deaths in each London borough, age group or category, and might allow the identification of individuals. Consequently this level of detail has not been provided, in line with ONS policy on protecting confidentiality within birth and death statistics.(5)
	(1) Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 260-269 (malnutrition) for the year 2000, and the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes E40-E46 (malnutrition) for 2001 onwards. Deaths were included where one of these causes was the underlying cause of death. The introduction of ICD-10 in 2001 means that the numbers of deaths from malnutrition before 2001 are not completely comparable with later years.
	(2) 'Private care home' includes non-NHS private nursing homes and private residential homes; 'Public care home' includes NHS private nursing homes and local authority residential homes.
	(3) Figures are based on boundaries as of 2010.
	(4) Figures are for deaths registered in the calendar years 2000-08 combined.
	(5) The ONS policy on protecting confidentiality within birth and death statistics is available on the National Statistics website at:
	http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_health/ConfidentialityBirthDeath.pdf
	
		
			  Table 1: Deaths where malnutrition was the underlying cause of death,( 1)  by age group, for each London borough,( 2)  2000-08( 3) 
			  Deaths  (persons) 
			  London borough  0-44  45-74  75+ 
			 Barking and Dagenham 0 1 1 
			 Barnet 1 0 0 
			 Bexley 0 0 0 
			 Brent 1 0 2 
			 Bromley 0 1 1 
			 Camden 0 0 1 
			 City of London 0 0 0 
			 Croydon 0 0 1 
			 Ealing 1 1 0 
			 Enfield 1 1 0 
			 Greenwich 0 0 0 
			 Hackney 0 2 2 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 0 0 2 
			 Haringey 0 0 1 
			 Harrow 0 0 0 
			 Havering 0 0 1 
			 Hillingdon 0 2 2 
			 Hounslow 1 1 2 
			 Islington 0 0 0 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 0 1 0 
			 Kingston upon Thames 1 0 1 
			 Lambeth 0 2 6 
			 Lewisham 1 0 0 
			 Merton 0 1 1 
			 Newham 0 2 0 
			 Redbridge 1 0 0 
			 Richmond upon Thames 0 0 0 
			 Southwark 0 1 1 
			 Sutton 0 1 1 
			 Tower Hamlets 1 0 3 
			 Waltham Forest 0 1 1 
			 Wandsworth 0 2 2 
			 Westminster 0 2 1 
			 (1) Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 260-269 (malnutrition) for the year 2000, and the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes E40-E46 (malnutrition) for 2001 onwards. Deaths were included where these codes were the underlying cause of death. The introduction of ICD-10 in 2001 means that the number of deaths from malnutrition before 2001 is not completely comparable with later years. (2) Figures based on boundaries as of 2010. (3) Figures are for deaths registered in the calendar years 2000-08 combined. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Deaths where malnutrition and effects of hunger were mentioned on the death certificate,( 1)  by age group, for each London borough,( 2)  2000-08( 3) 
			  Deaths (persons) 
			  London borough  0-44  45-74  75+ 
			 Barking and Dagenham 0 2 2 
			 Barnet 2 3 4 
			 Bexley 0 3 2 
			 Brent 1 3 3 
			 Bromley 1 2 5 
			 Camden 0 5 3 
			 City of London 0 0 1 
			 Croydon 1 1 3 
			 Ealing 3 6 4 
			 Enfield 1 2 3 
			 Greenwich 1 1 2 
			 Hackney 0 3 8 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 0 5 2 
			 Haringey 1 0 1 
			 Harrow 0 1 1 
			 Havering 0 1 2 
			 Hillingdon 0 2 7 
			 Hounslow 1 1 4 
			 Islington 0 3 2 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 2 3 2 
			 Kingston upon Thames 1 0 1 
			 Lambeth 1 9 10 
			 Lewisham 3 0 1 
			 Merton 0 2 3 
			 Newham 1 4 1 
			 Redbridge 2 1 2 
			 Richmond upon Thames 0 0 2 
			 Southwark 1 5 4 
			 Sutton 0 1 4 
			 Tower Hamlets 1 3 7 
			 Waltham Forest 0 2 1 
			 Wandsworth 0 6 9 
			 Westminster 3 6 8 
			 (1) Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 260-269 (malnutrition) and E904.1 (effects of hunger) for the year 2000, and the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes E40-E46 (malnutrition) and T73.0 (effects of hunger) for 2001 onwards. Deaths were included where one or more of these causes was mentioned anywhere on the death certificate. The introduction of ICD-10 in 2001 means that the numbers of deaths from these causes before 2001 are not completely comparable with later years. (2) Figures based on boundaries as of 2010. (3) Figures arc for deaths registered in the calendar years 2000-08 combined. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 3: Deaths where malnutrition and effects of hunger were mentioned on the death certificate,( 1)  in private and public care homes,( 2)  in London government office region,( 3)  2000 - 08( 4) 
			  Deaths (persons) 
			   Private care home  Public care home 
			 2000 1 2 
			 2001 2 0 
			 2002 0 0 
			 2003 2 0 
			 2004 1 0 
			 2005 2 0 
			 2006 2 0 
			 2007 1 0 
			 2008 1 0 
			 (1) Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes 260-269 (malnutrition) and E904.1 (effects of hunger) for the year 2000, and the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes E40-E46 (malnutrition) and T73.0 (effects of hunger) for 2001 onwards. Deaths were included where one or more of these causes was mentioned anywhere on the death certificate. The introduction of ICD-10 in 2001 means that the numbers of deaths from this cause before 2001 are not completely comparable with later years. (2) 'Private care home' includes non-NHS private nursing homes and private residential homes; 'Public care home' includes NHS private nursing homes and local authority residential homes. (3) Figures are based on boundaries as of 2010. (4) Figures are for deaths registered in each calendar year.

Employment

John Leech: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what the re-employment rate is for  (a) public and  (b) private sector workers whose jobs have been relocated offshore; and if she will make a statement.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question concerning the re-employment rate for (a) public and (b) private sector workers whose jobs have been offshored. (323582)
	The requested information is not available.

Government Departments: Data Sharing

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what steps her Department is taking to facilitate data sharing between Government departments and agencies.

Michael Wills: I have been asked to reply.
	As part of 'Putting the frontline first: Smarter Government', the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) has been tasked with making it easier for public services to join up by establishing a set of common protocols and reviewing the legal framework that governs the way in which public services exchange information. MOJ is delivering on this objective through a variety of work streams, including:
	revising the departmental 2003 legal guidance on data sharing;
	developing Government guidance on privacy impact assessments;
	liaising with the Information Commissioner's Office on its statutory code of practice on data sharing;
	consulting other Government Departments on the further guidance and information sharing protocols they need; and
	exploring in more detail the barriers to the exchange of information between public services, and how legislative and non-legislative options might reduce these barriers and ensure proportionate and lawful information exchange can take place to improve public services, while ensuring that individuals' personal data is protected.

Government Departments: Publications

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office on what occasions the UK Statistics Authority has written to Government departments and agencies on the presentation of statistics.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Sir Michael Scholar KCB, dated 22 March 2010:
	.
	Correspondence between the Chair of the UK Statistics Authority and Government Departments, agencies, and public bodies about the presentation of statistics and other matters is published on the Statistics Authority website at:
	http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/reports---correspondence /correspondence/index.html

Private Sector: Manpower

Theresa May: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many UK-born working age people were employed in the private sector  (a) in each year since 1997 and  (b) on the most recent date for which data are available.

Angela Smith: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	 Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated March 2010:
	As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, 1 have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking how many UK-born working age people were employed in the private sector (a) in each year since 1997 and (b) on the most recent date for which data are available. (324195)
	The available information is provided in the attached table. The estimates are derived from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). The distinction between public and private sector is based on respondents' views about the organisation for which they work.
	As with any sample survey, the estimates provided are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
	
		
			  UK-born people of working age in employment in the private sector( 1) , t hree month period ending December, 1997 to 2009 ,  United Kingdom, not seasonally adjusted 
			  Thousand 
			   Level 
			 1997 18,354 
			 1998 18,635 
			 1999 18,816 
			 2000 18,781 
			 2001 18,935 
			 2002 18,948 
			 2003 18.877 
			 2004 18,785 
			 2005 18,622 
			 2006 18,663 
			 2007 18,617 
			 2008 18,206 
			 2009(2) *17,710 
			 (1) It should be noted that the private sector estimates are based on survey respondents' views about the organisation for which they work and therefore do not correspond to the National Accounts definition used to define Public and Private Sector Employment estimates. (2) Coefficients of Variation have been calculated as an indication of the quality of the estimates, as described below:  Guide to Quality: The Coefficient of Variation (CV) indicates the quality of an estimate, the smaller the CV value the higher the quality. The true value is likely to lie within +/- twice the CV - for example, for an estimate of 200 with a CV of 5% we would expect the population total to be within the range 180-220.  Key Coefficient of Variation (CV)(%) Statistical Robustness * 0 ≤ CV 5 Estimates are considered precise ** 5 ≤ CV  10 Estimates are considered reasonably precise *** 10 ≤ CV  20 Estimates are considered acceptable **** CV ≥ 20 Estimates are considered too unreliable for practical purposes  Note: It should be noted that the above estimates exclude people in most types of communal establishment (e.g. hotels, boarding houses, hostels, mobile home sites etc.)  Source: Labour Force Survey

HOME DEPARTMENT

Asylum

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  how many people of each sex in each age group from each country have been awaiting a decision on an application for asylum at each location in each year since 1997;
	(2)  how many people are awaiting a decision on an application for asylum.

Alan Johnson: Information is published quarterly on the number of asylum applicants awaiting an initial decision and as at the end of December 2009, the latest published period, the total was 6,900 (excluding dependents). This figure is derived from the cumulative effect of applications received, decisions made, and applications withdrawn, applied to the total outstanding cases figure produced from the manual count at the end of August 2001. Figures are rounded to nearest 100. The original manual count was a total figure only and consequently the figure cannot be broken down by nationality, gender and age.
	Information on asylum applications is published annually in the Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom bulletin and on a quarterly basis in the Control of Immigration Quarterly Statistical Summary.
	These publications are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate website at:
	www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration-asylum-stats.html

Asylum

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum applications were awaiting resolution by the UK Border Agency on the latest date for which figures are available.

Phil Woolas: The UK Border Agency has just over 34,700 cases in NAM (New Asylum Model) that have not been concluded as at the end of February 2010, the majority of which are awaiting removal. These cases are being actively managed. Figure is rounded to the nearest 100.
	This data does not constitute part of National Statistics as they are based on internal management information. The information has not been quality assured under National Statistics protocols and should be treated as provisional and subject to change.
	Information on asylum applications is published annually in the Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom bulletin and on a quarterly basis in the Control of Immigration Quarterly Statistical Summary.
	These publications are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate website at:
	www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration-asylum-stats.html

Asylum

William Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what changes in staffing levels at the UK Border Agency have been made to handle the caseload of  (a) legacy asylum cases and  (b) standard asylum applications since 2007.

Phil Woolas: The UK Border Agency has anticipated the need to increase resources in line with its targets and has recruited sufficient case owners in each of its regions to continue to improve the time taken to reach an initial decision.
	The UK Border Agency's regions are now fully responsible for the development of the required flexible work force, and will be investing in case owner development and managing regionally-based recruitment campaigns as necessary so that staff can carry out a variety of functions and respond to fluctuations in intake.

Asylum: Scotland

William Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum legacy cases arising in  (a) 2007,  (b) 2008 and  (c) 2009 the UK Border Agency is dealing with in (i) Glasgow North East constituency, (ii) the City of Glasgow and (iii) Scotland.

Phil Woolas: All cases being dealt with by the Case Resolution Directorate were lodged prior to March 2007. Therefore, there are no applications submitted post-2007 that are being dealt with in the Legacy programme.

Departmental Energy

Dan Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps his Department plans to take to participate in the Earth Hour event on 27 March 2010.

Phil Woolas: On 27 March 2010 the Home Office will again support Earth Hour. Non-operational lights will be turned off at our major locations. Last year my Department ran a 'switch it off' campaign to coincide with the Earth Hour to encourage staff to switch off lights, computers and printers at work and to participate at home as well. Across several of our major locations the lights were turned off and as a result 2,491 kilogrammes of carbon dioxide was saved compared to a preceding period. We plan to take part in the event in the same way this year.

Departmental Temporary Employment

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department from which companies his Department sourced temporary staff in each of the last three years; how many temporary staff his Department employed in each year; and what the monetary value of the contracts with each such company was in each such year.

Phil Woolas: The Home Department sources temporary staff of all kinds from a range of companies from small-scale, niche suppliers to large companies with national coverage. Since such individuals are not Home Office employees, the amalgamated information sought is not held centrally and attempting to assemble it could not be undertaken without incurring disproportionate cost. In terms of monetary values, the Department is able to provide the following information on its expenditure in the last three years through contracts with some of its leading suppliers of temporary staff in those years. The spend in this category is being realigned and is currently reckoned at some £13 million per annum, which in 2008-09 represented less than 1 per cent. of total expenditure by the Home Office and its agencies of £1,749 million. All figures provided are subject to accounting adjustment and amendment.
	
		
			  £ million 
			  Supplier  2009-10  2008-09  2007-08 
			 Hays Executive 3.4 2.1 1.4 
			 Manpower Inc. 3.5 2.0 1.0 
			 OGC/Buying Solutions 3.3 1.1 0.1 
			 MPS Group Inc. 1.9 1.5 0.9 
			 TAC Technology Project Services 2.5 0.8 0.1 
			 Office Angels Ltd. 1.4 1.1 0.2 
			 James Reed and Partners plc 1.1 0.8 0.4 
			 Methods Holdings Ltd. 0.8 1.1 0.3 
			 Hudson Highland Group Inc. 0.7 0.7 0.8 
			 Parity Group plc 1.0 1.0 n/a 
			 Interquest Group plc 0.7 0.7 0.7

Departmental Travel

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much  (a) Ministers and  (b) staff of each grade in (i) his Department and (ii) its agencies spent on first class travel in the last 12 months.

Phil Woolas: Contracted expenditure by the Home Department, inclusive of the UKBA and the Criminal Records Bureau, on first class rail travel by  (a) Ministers and  (b) staff of each grade for the period 1 February 2009 to 10 January 2010 is as follows:
	
		
			  Table 1: First class rail travel 
			  £ 
			   Home Office/UKBA  CRB 
			  Ministers 16,570 - 
			
			  Staff grades:   
			 Senior Civil Service (SCS) 214,145 39,917 
			 Grade 6 342,378 17,682 
			 Grade 7 781,329 50,761 
			 SEO 701,693 66,579 
			 HEO 137,890 21,796 
			 HEOD 5,065 - 
			 HMI 13,940 - 
			 CIO 3,535 - 
			 EO 63,595 6,781 
			 IO 3,709 - 
			 PS 2,642 - 
			 AO 25,666 2,444 
			 AA 1,152 376 
			 Grade unspecified 81,979 9,332 
		
	
	Contracted expenditure by the Home Department, inclusive of the UKBA and the Criminal Records Bureau on first class air travel by  (a) Ministers and  (b) staff of each grade for the period 1 February 2009 to 10 January 2010 is as follows:
	
		
			  Table 2: First class air travel 
			  £ 
			   Home Office/UKBA  CRB 
			  Minister 348 0 
			
			  Staff grades:   
			 SEO 351 0 
			 HEO 348 0 
			  Note:  In a small number of journeys staff were upgraded to first class at no additional cost. 
		
	
	Total expenditure by the Identity and Passport Service on first class rail travel by all staff for the period January to December 2009 was £873,042. A breakdown of expenditure by grade could be made available only at disproportionate cost. There was no expenditure on first class air travel by the Identity and Passport Service.

Detention Centres

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  how many incidents of self-harm by  (a) women,  (b) men,  (c) children under 18 years old and  (d) children under 10 years old requiring medical treatment there were at each immigration removal centre in the UK in each of the last six years;
	(2)  how many incidents of self-harm by  (a) women,  (b) men,  (c) children under 18 years old and  (d) children under 10 years old were recorded at each immigration removal centre in the UK in each of the last six years.

Phil Woolas: We do not record centrally every incident of self harm, only those incidents where medical treatment was required. The figures represent the total in each financial year for when data was available for Immigration Removal Centres.
	
		
			  Number 
			 2009-10(1) (2)145 
			 2008-09 174 
			 2007-08 163 
			 2006-07 197 
			 2005-06 232 
			 (1) Includes figures for Brook House Immigration Removal Centre which opened towards the end of March 2009. (2) As at the end of January 
		
	
	There are over 2,500 people in removal centres at any one time. In 2009, we published for the first time, data on the number of people entering detention. In 2009-10 to the end of January, 20,805 people came into immigration removal centres.
	This data is normally used for management information only and is not subject to the detailed checks that apply for national statistics publications. It is provisional and subject to change. Published national statistics on the number of adults and children held in detention solely under Immigration Act powers on a snapshot basis are published quarterly and are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office's Research, Development and Statistics website at:
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration-asylum-stats.html
	We take the safety of those in our care very seriously, and operate a system called Assessment Care in Detention and Teamwork (ACDT) to identify and help those who are at risk of suicide or self harm. Notices in various languages are displayed around Centres setting out that, where there is a concern about a fellow detainee, this should be brought to the attention of a member of staff.

Detention Centres

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many hunger strikes were recorded at each immigration removal centre in the UK in each of the last six years; and how many of them involved  (a) male parents detained with their children,  (b) female parents detained with their children,  (c) children aged under 18 years old and  (d) children aged under 10 years old.

Phil Woolas: There has been inaccurate reporting in the media of a hunger strike at Yarl's Wood immigration removal centre. While a small number of detainees were refusing formal meals from the canteen, we are aware that they have accessed food from the centre's shop, vending machines and social visitors. They were all also drinking.
	We only record information on detainees who have missed four consecutive meals, excluding breakfast. Such detainees miss meals for a number of reasons, including fasting due to their religious faith. We do not record the number who state they are refusing food in protest at a particular issue.
	All those who miss meals are monitored closely by the centre, including health care, where they will receive advice on diet and welfare issues.
	The UK Border Agency and the Centre management engage closely with such detainees to understand the reason for them missing meals and to seek to resolve any underlying problems.

Entry Clearances: Kosovo

Denis MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether Kosovan citizens of Serb extraction may enter the UK using passports issued in Belgrade.

Phil Woolas: Since 2008, passports issued by the competent Kosovan authorities have been accepted for travel to the United Kingdom (UK). These documents are generally issued by the Kosovan authorities in Pristina. Serbian passports, which are issued by the competent Serbian authorities, are also accepted for travel to the UK.
	Both Serbian and Kosovan nationals require visas before travelling to the UK and are subject to immigration control on arrival.
	The UK Border Agency is unable to comment on whether Kosovan citizens of Serbian extraction would qualify for a Serbian national passport. This would be a matter for the Serbian authorities.

Entry Clearances: Overseas Students

Adrian Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the effect on numbers of English language schools of recent changes to the Tier 4 points-based immigration system.

Phil Woolas: These changes came into force on 3 March and we continually monitor Tier 4 to ensure its effectiveness. Our policies are carefully balanced to protect the integrity of the UK's immigration system while safeguarding the ability for genuine international students who wish to study here.

Identity Cards

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether  (a) his Department and  (b) the Identity and Passport Service has had discussions with (i) the Local Government Association, (ii) London councils, (iii) passenger transport executives and (iv) local authorities on the use of identity cards to help administer the concessionary bus fare scheme.

Meg Hillier: holding answer 23 March 2010
	 There have been no such discussions. However, identity cards and the National Identity Register should provide a number of opportunities to deliver public services more efficiently and effectively in the future.

Identity Cards: Fees and Charges

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much the Identity and Passport Service had collected in fees from people issued with identity cards on the latest date for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Hillier: The Identity and Passport Service (IPS) has collected approximately £115,000 in identity card fees to the end of February 2010.
	The IPS Annual Report and Accounts for 2009-10 will include audited disclosure of operational identity card income and expenditure.

Identity Cards: Fees and Charges

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what his most recent estimate is of the cost to applicants of the new model of identity card due to be issued in 2012; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Hillier: From 2012, the Identity and Passport Service will extend the rollout of identity cards across the United Kingdom, alongside the introduction of second generation biometric passports, but there are no formal plans to introduce a new model of identity card.
	The fee for an identity card is £30 in 2009 and 2010, as set out in the March 2008 National Identity Scheme Delivery Plan. The level of fees that will apply in the future has not been finalised and will depend on the future fee strategy for passports and identity cards.

Immigration

Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will review the mechanisms by which his Department considers immigration applications from adults who arrived in the UK as children for the purposes of ensuring consistency in his Department's decisions on whether to grant leave to remain in such cases; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: holding answer 22 February 2010
	There is a range of categories under which a child may arrive in the United Kingdom and who may stay into adulthood. The specific criteria and application consideration will vary for each respective category and it is therefore not possible to be consistent across the board.

Immigration

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications held by the Legacy caseworking team at the UK Border Agency were awaiting allocation to a caseworker on the latest date for which figures are available.

Phil Woolas: holding answer 15 March 2010
	No cases are currently awaiting allocation to a case owner. On 17 December 2007 every Case Resolution Directorate (CRD) case was allocated to a case owner.

Immigration: Detainees

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many detainees held at immigration removal centres have required  (a) medical treatment and  (b) hospital treatment in each of the last two years.

Phil Woolas: holding answer 22 March 2010
	The information requested is not recorded centrally and could be provided only by examination of individual records which would be at disproportionate cost.
	However, each immigration removal centre provides on-site medical care 24 hours a day. All detainees are seen by a nurse for a health screening within two hours of arrival at a centre and are given an appointment to see the GP within 24 hours. GPs see detainees earlier if required. Thereafter, they access health care on demand, subject to a triage service similar to that found in GP surgeries in the community.
	Secondary treatment is provided by the local primary care trust by way of a referral from healthcare.

Immigration: Detainees

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many times police have been called to each UK Border Agency immigration removal centre in each of the last two years.

Phil Woolas: holding answer 22 March 2010
	The data requested are not recorded at immigration removal centres and could be provided by the UK Border Agency by only examination of individual security records at each centre at disproportionate cost.
	The police might be called for a variety of different reasons, including where an offence may have been committed such as an attempt to import drugs into a centre, or to assist with managing disturbances.

Members: Correspondence

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he plans to reply to the letter of 14 December 2009 from the hon. Member for Aylesbury on behalf of Mr. R. V. of Aylesbury, acknowledged by his Department on 21 December 2009.

Phil Woolas: holding answer 18 March 2010
	The reply letter was sent out on 18 March 2010.

Ministers' Private Offices

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what expenditure his private office incurred on  (a) entertainment,  (b) travel and  (c) overnight subsistence in each of the last five years.

Alan Johnson: The expenditure incurred on entertainment, travel and overnight subsistence in Private Office for the last two financial years is as follows. Information relating to years before this is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	 2008- 09
	Entertainment: £2,719
	Travel: £111,269
	Overnight subsistence: £5,192
	 2009- 10 (to February)
	Entertainment: £727
	Travel: £46,260
	Overnight subsistence: £13,570
	The term 'entertainment' encompasses working lunches, tea and coffees and sandwiches for all meetings attended by outside stakeholders.

National Identity Register

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether local authorities will have access to the National Identity Register for the purposes of the administration of free bus travel for those aged 60 years and over.

Meg Hillier: holding answer 23 March 2010
	 Information cannot be provided to a local authority from the national identity register without further secondary legislation and there are no current plans to do so for the administration of concessionary bus passes. However, an individual may choose to show an identity card to a local authority or to anyone else to help verify their identity, including age.

Police: Finance

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much funding his Department allocated for the  (a) recruitment and  (b) training of police officers in each year since 1997.

Alan Johnson: The Home Office does not allocate specific grants for recruitment of police officers and since 2008-09 the former specific grant for the Initial Police Learning Development Programme has been absorbed into the main police grant at the level prevailing in 2007-08 of £16.2 million. Expenditure on recruitment and training is a matter for each individual police force.
	Centrex prior to its abolition, and since 1 April 2007, the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA), through National Assessment Centres has managed the recruitment of police officers funded from its overall grant in aid from the Home Office.

Police: Finance

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what funding his Department has allocated to Devon and Cornwall police for 2009-10  (a) in total and  (b) per head of population.

David Hanson: The information is as follows:
	 (a) The information available can be found in the following table:
	
		
			  Devon and Cornwall police authority funding 
			   £ million 
			 2009-10 231.8 
			  Note:  This figure comprises the Home Office Police Grant and certain Specific Grants and Capital Provision, and also the Revenue Support Grant and National Non-Domestic Rates (both provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government). 
		
	
	 (b) The Government do not distribute grant to police authorities on a per capita basis. The police funding formula used includes data relating to demographic and social characteristics to reflect the needs of each police authority. Police grants allocated by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Welsh Assembly Government also take into account the relative tax base of each police authority. Grant allocations are stabilised by damping to limit year-on-year variations.

Police: Finance

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what funding his Department has allocated to police authorities in England for 2009-10  (a) in total and  (b) per head of population.

David Hanson: The information requested is as follows:
	 (a) The information available can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  England police funding 
			   £ billion 
			 2009-10 10.1 
			 Note: This figure comprises the Home Office Police Grant and certain Specific Grants and Capital Provision, and also the Revenue Support Grant and National Non-Domestic Rates (both provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government). 
		
	
	 (b) The Government do not distribute grant to police authorities on a per capita basis. The police funding formula used includes data relating to demographic and social characteristics to reflect the needs of each police authority. Police grants allocated by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Welsh Assembly Government also take into account the relative tax base of each police authority. Grant allocations are stabilised by damping to limit year-on-year variations.

Police: Finance

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what funding his Department allocated to Devon and Cornwall police for 1995-96  (a) in total and  (b) per head of population.

David Hanson: The information is as follows:
	 (a) The information available can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  Devon and Cornwall police authority funding 
			   £ million 
			 1995-96 126.6 
			  Note: This figure comprises the Home Office Police Grant and certain Specific Grants and Capital Provision, and also the Revenue Support Grant and National Non-Domestic Rates (both provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government). 
		
	
	 (b) The Government do not distribute grant to police authorities on a per capita basis. The police funding formula used includes data relating to demographic and social characteristics to reflect the needs of each police authority. Police grants allocated by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Welsh Assembly Government also take into account the relative tax base of each police authority. Grant allocations are stabilised by damping to limit year-on-year variations.

Police: Finance

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what funding his Department allocated to police authorities in England for 1995-96  (a) in total and  (b) per head of population.

David Hanson: The information requested is as follows:
	 (a) The information available can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  England :  police funding 
			   £ billion 
			 1995-96 5.5 
			  Note: This figure comprises the Home Office Police grant and certain specific grants and capital provision, and also the Revenue support grant and national non-domestic rates (both provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government). 
		
	
	 (b) The Government do not distribute grant to police authorities on a per capita basis. The police funding formula used includes data relating to demographic and social characteristics to reflect the needs of each police authority. Police grants allocated by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Welsh Assembly Government also take into account the relative tax base of each police authority. Grant allocations are stabilised by damping to limit year-on-year variations.

Powers of Entry

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough of 24 February 2010,  Official Report, column 554W, on powers of entry 
	(1)  which  (a) new and  (b) amended powers of entry have been created since October 2007;
	(2)  which  (a) new and  (b) amended powers of entry created since October 2007 were not subject to formal consultation with his Department.

David Hanson: The statutory provisions that are now in force and have been subject to referral to my Department since October 2007 are in the following table.
	I am aware of the following three statutory instruments that contain powers of entry were not referred to my department for consideration.
	The Official Feed and Food Controls (England) Regulations 2009 (2009/3255) which revoke the 2007 Regulations and re-enacts the same powers of entry was not referred for consideration but is in accordance with the guidance. The powers of entry in the 2009 regulations are substantially unchanged from those in the original 2005 Regulations which were considered by my Department.
	Also the Poultry Compartments (England) Order (2010/108) was not referred for consideration but is in accordance with the guidance.
	The Merchant Shipping and Fishing Vessels (Health and Safety at Work) (Biological Agents) Regulations (2010/323) was not referred for consideration but is in accordance with the guidance. The powers of entry used are from the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 which were considered by my Department.
	Any power of entry is granted by statute and therefore subject to parliamentary scrutiny of achieving the balance between sufficient powers to enforce and adequate protections for the individual.
	The Home Department was consulted in respect of the power of entry contained in the draft Environmental Civil Sanctions (England) Order 2010 which is not yet in force.
	
		
			  Primary legislation 
			   Year  Statute  Department responsible  Number of powers 
			 1 2006 Childcare Act 2006 (as amended by Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009) Part 3A Inspection of Children Centres. s.98D: Inspection of Children Centres powers of entry without warrant. s.98F: Power of constable to assist in exercise of power of entry under a warrant. DCSF 2 
			 2 2008 Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Repeals and replaces powers of entry etc. under the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003) s.62-65: Powers of person authorised by Care Quality Commission to enter and inspect regulated premises. DoH 1 
			 3 2009 Banking Act 2009-Enforcement of inter-bank payment system s.194: JP may issue warrant to authorised BoE inspector appointed under s.193 or constable to enter and search premises/part of premises where inter-bank payment system is managed or operated. HMT 1 
			 4 2009 Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 Part eight, Chapter two Common enforcement powers s.246: Power of enforcement officer to board and inspect vessels and marine installations. s.247: Power of enforcement officer to enter and inspect premises for purposes of exercising functions. s.248: Power of enforcement officer to enter and inspect vehicles purposes of exercising functions. s.249/Schedule 17: Provides for issue of warrant to authorise enforcement officer to enter a dwelling. (Believed these provisions may replace one or more powers in marine/fishery protection/regulation type legislation) DEFRA 4 
		
	
	
		
			  Secondary Legislation: 
			  N o.  Year  SI  no.  Authority  Title  Department  No.  of powers 
			 1 2008 2347 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20082347_en_1 Sea Fishing (Recovery Measures) Order 2008 [2008/2347] Reg 13 Powers of British sea-fishery officers in relation to fishing boats Reg 14 Powers of British sea-fishery officers on land Reg 15 Warrant to enter premises DEFRA 3 
			 2 2008 2795 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20082795_en_1 Cat and Dog Fur (Control of Import, Export and Placing on the Market) Regulations 2008 [2008/2795]  Reg 3: Powers of investigation and enforcement BIS 1 
			 3 2009 1899 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20091899_en_1 Motor Vehicles (Replacement Catalytic Converters and Pollution Control Devices) Regulations 2009 [2009/1899] Reg 9(2) and Schedule Para. 5: Powers of search etc. (2): Power of authorised enforcement officer to enter premises without warrant-not dwellings (5): JP may issue warrant authorising authorised enforcement officer to enter premises DfT 2 
			 4 2009 261 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20090261_en_1 Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Regulations 2009 [2009/261] (Revoke and remake with amendments the Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Regulations 2008/41) Reg 46: Powers of authorised persons to enforce regulations DEFRA 1 
			 5 2009 2048 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/pdf/uksi_20092048_en.pdf Port Security Regulations 2009 [2009/2048] Reg. 25: Powers of a constable, port security officers and others to enter and search controlled buildings in designated ports DfT 1 
			 6 2009 463 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20090463_en_5 Aquatic Animal Health (England and Wales) Regulations 2009 [2009/463] Reg. 32(2): Entry and inspection of land and premises w/o warrant Reg. 32(3): Warrant to enter dwelling DEFRA 2 
			 7 2009 360 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/wales/wsi2009/wsi_20090360_en_1 European Fisheries Fund (Grants) (Wales) Regulations 2009 [2009/360] Reg 12: Powers of authorised officers NAFW 1 
			 8 2009 842 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20090842_en_4#pt5-l1g26 Organic Products Regulations [2009/842] (revoke and replace Organic Products Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1604) Reg 23: Powers of entry-authorised officers Reg 24: Powers after entry DEFRA 1 
			 9 2009 209 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20090209_en_8 Payment Services Regulations 2009 [2009/209] Reg 83: Entry, inspection without a warrant etc-FSA officer HMT 1 
			 10 2009 717 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20090717_en_7#pt6-pb1-l1g34 Road Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2009 [2009/717] Reg 34: Powers of entry-authorised person DfT 1 
			 11 2009 216 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20090216_en_1 Ozone-Depleting Substances (Qualifications) Regulations 2009 [2009/216] (revoke and replace, with amendments, Ozone Depleting Substances (Qualifications) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006/1510) Reg 8: Powers of an authorised person DEFRA 1 
			 12 2009 2194 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20092194_en_1 Motor Vehicles (Refilling of Air Conditioning Systems by Service Providers) Regulations [2009/2194] Reg eight: Powers of search etc. (2): Power of authorised enforcement officer to enter premises without warrant-not dwellings (4): JP may issue warrant authorising authorised enforcement officer to enter premises DfT 2 
			 13 2009 1361 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20091361_en_1 Marketing of Fresh Horticultural Produce Regulations 2009 [2009/1361] Reg. 7(1) Power of authorised officer to enter without warrant to enforce Regs Reg 7(4): Entry on warrant DEFRA 2 
			 14 2009 1551 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/wales/wsi2009/wsi_20091551_en_1 Marketing of Fresh Horticultural Produce (Wales) Regulations 2009 [2009/1551] W151 Reg. 7(1) Power of authorised officer to enter without warrant to enforce Regs Reg 7(4): Entry on warrant NAFW 2 
			 15 2008 3252 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/pdf/uksi_20083252_en.pdf Beef and Veal Labelling Regulations 2008 [2008/3252] Reg 6(1) Entry to inspect w/o warrant Reg 6(3) Entry on warrant Revokes Beef Labelling (Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2000 [2000/3047] DEFRA 2 
			 16 2009 1850 European Communities Act 1972 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/pdf/uksi_20091850_en.pdf Sea Fishing (Landing and Weighing of Herring, Mackerel and Horse Mackerel) Order 2009 [2009/1850] Reg 11 Powers of British sea-fishery officers in relation to fishing boats Reg 12 Powers of British sea-fishery officers on land Reg 13 Warrant to enter premises DEFRA 3

Terrorism: Stop and Search

Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent estimate his Department has made of the proportion of people from an ethnic minority background who have been stopped and searched under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 since the Act came into force.

David Hanson: Information on stop and search section 44 is collected centrally by the Home Office and provisional data are published quarterly in the official statistics publication 'Operation of police powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 and subsequent legislation: arrest, outcomes and stops and searches, Great Britain.' The most recent publication (released February 2010) provides an update to 30 September 2009 and shows that of the 200,444 people stopped and searched under section 44 in the year ending 30 September 2009, 63,535 individuals self-identified as from a Black, Asian, Chinese/Other or of mixed ethnicity background. This equates to 32 per cent. of the total recorded for this period.
	The data are published quarterly and the latest update can be found here:
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/hosb0410.pdf
	This data are considered provisional and full quality assured data are published by the Home Office in the annual statistical report 'Police Powers and Procedure,' further ethnicity breakdown will be available in the Ministry of Justice annual report on 'Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System.'

UK Border Agency: Complaints

Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints about a citizenship or nationality application were made to the UK Border Agency in each of the last five years.

Phil Woolas: The UK Border Agency does not hold central information to the level of detail asked for in this question. However, data are available relating to all types of complaints about the service that the agency provides. In 2008 there were 10,835 such complaints received by the agency and in 2009 there were 12,038.

UK Border Agency: Expenditure

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much the UK Border Agency and its predecessor spent on  (a) advertising,  (b) refreshments and  (c) stationery in each year since 2005.

Phil Woolas: The amount that the UK Border Agency and its predecessor spent on  (a) advertising,  (b) refreshments and  (c) stationery in each year since 2005, is shown in the following table. Advertising is used by the agency when recruiting staff and to promote compliance with immigration and customs regulations.
	
		
			  Amount spent on (a) advertising, (b) refreshments and (c) stationery UK Border Agency 2005-08 
			  £ 
			   Advertising  Refreshments  Stationery 
			 2005-06 0 298,320 4,139,851 
			 2006-07 0 287,712 5,001,987 
			 2007-08 16,049 246,391 4,428,372 
			 2008-09 0 204,576 2,939,244 
			  Notes: 1. Stationery: The figures for refreshments and stationary were drawn from cost code categories in the computerised general ledger to which invoices are posted. The costs will include a wide range of items form basic stationary to specialist forms. 2. Advertising: Recruitment advertising has not been included as it is not conducted centrally and hence spend could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Most customer/public facing advertising undertaken by the UK Border Agency during the period covered was undertaken on behalf of the Home Office or other Departments and is therefore accounted for within the advertising spend of those Departments, not the agency.

Young Offenders: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  how many community rehabilitation orders were  (a) issued for each reason to and  (b) breached by offenders aged (i) 12, (ii) 13, (iii) 14, (iv) 15, (v) 16, (vi) 17, (vii) 18 and (viii) 19 years old in each London borough in each year since 2002;
	(2)  how many  (a) reparation,  (b) action plan,  (c) attendance centre,  (d) curfew orders with conditions and  (e) supervision orders were (i) issued for each reason to and (ii) breached by offenders aged (A) 12, (B) 13, (C) 14, (D) 15, (E) 16, (F) 17, (G) 18 and (H) 19 years old in each London borough in each year since 2002.

Claire Ward: I have been asked to reply.
	The available information is provided in the following table.
	Data for 2009 will be available when Sentencing Statistics 2009 is published later this year.
	The Court Proceedings database does not have data by boroughs. The information provided is for the London criminal justice area.
	Due to data quality issues we are unable to provide information on breaches from the Courts Proceeding database. Work is currently under way to resolve this.
	The Courts Proceeding database does not record information on reasons why these orders have been issued, other than the offence committed.
	The figures referred to in the response relate to stand alone community sentences only. Requirements similar to those of the stand alone orders which have been given as part of the generic Community Order are not included. The Community Order, brought in by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 is available for offenders 18 and over and whose offence was committed from April 2005.
	The community rehabilitation order and the standalone curfew order were replaced by the community order under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, from April 2005 for offenders over 18.
	Community rehabilitation orders do not apply to offenders aged under 16.
	Action plan order and reparation orders apply for offenders aged under 18.
	
		
			  Total number of persons given community sentences for 12 to 19-year-olds, and by London criminal justice area 2002-08 
			  Types of community sentences  Age  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 
			 Community Rehabilitation Order 12 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  13 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  14 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  15 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  16 61 29 64 62 39 58 73 
			  17 237 183 173 207 144 185 216 
			  18 390 291 251 132 23 31 20 
			  19 392 293 223 142 10 0 0 
			  
			 Reparation Order 12 5 6 2 3 6 3 0 
			  13 32 9 8 9 19 20 14 
			  14 57 24 28 23 38 36 34 
			  15 106 65 48 57 76 90 73 
			  16 104 69 68 55 102 99 76 
			  17 106 56 56 55 72 68 60 
			  18 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  19 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  
			 Action Plan Order 12 16 12 9 7 10 9 14 
			  13 56 27 28 20 25 39 18 
			  14 130 71 71 64 79 74 62 
			  15 209 131 113 116 141 115 104 
			  16 192 129 134 141 145 132 116 
			  17 181 111 91 118 131 127 107 
			  18 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  19 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			  
			 Attendance Centre 12 5 1 2 1 3 4 1 
			  13 13 8 11 6 6 6 7 
			  14 51 26 26 14 11 32 21 
			  15 89 45 50 52 42 68 47 
			  16 84 59 64 53 54 69 63 
			  17 77 60 55 49 67 82 66 
			  18 43 31 25 27 32 22 25 
			  19 27 20 19 15 22 15 13 
			  
			 Curfew Order 12 6 5 3 1 4 6 9 
			  13 20 13 18 15 11 29 41 
			  14 49 46 62 37 46 70 113 
			  15 76 91 113 113 83 158 193 
			  16 72 87 130 101 109 161 212 
			  17 69 63 94 88 76 119 225 
			  18 37 46 65 62 23 21 30 
			  19 32 61 61 49 19 15 23 
			 n/a = Not applicable  Notes: Community rehabilitation orders do not apply to offenders under 16. Reparation orders only apply to those aged 17 or under. These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. This data has been taken from the Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings database. This data is presented on the principal offence basis. Where an offender has been sentenced for more than one offence the principal offence is the one for which the heaviest sentence was imposed. Where the same sentence has been imposed for two or more offences the principal offence is the one for which the statutory maximum is most severe. Sentences at the Crown court are categorised according to the police force that prosecuted the offence including those sentences that may be given at a court outside the prosecuting police force's area. The statistics are presented by criminal justice area. Police force areas correspond to criminal justice areas except for the Metropolitan and City of London Police, which are combined to form the London criminal justice area. Prosecutions brought by agencies other than the police are categorised according to the criminal justice area of the sentencing court. In the case of sentences at magistrates courts, a change was made to the categorisation by area as part of the rollout of the Libra case management system in magistrates courts during 2008. Sentences given at courts using the Libra system are categorised according to the criminal justice area of the court while sentences given at courts not yet using the Libra system are categorised in the same way as at the Crown court. By the end of 2008, all magistrates courts were using Libra. This change will have almost no impact on the categorisation by area; only around 0.01 per cent. of sentences at magistrates courts could have been affected in 2007 and 2008. Police forces do not prosecute minor offences (those that are sentenced at magistrates courts) in courts outside their areas. The figures referred to in the response relate to stand alone community sentences only. Requirements similar to those of the stand alone orders which have been given as part of the generic community order are not included. The Community Order, which was brought in by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 is available for offenders 18 and over and whose offence was committed from April 2005.

Young Offenders: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many drug treatment and testing orders were  (a) issued for each reason to and  (b) breached by offenders aged (i) 12, (ii) 13, (iii) 14, (iv) 15, (v) 16, (vi) 17, (vii) 18 and (viii) 19 years old in each year since 2002.

Claire Ward: I have been asked to reply.
	The available information is provided in the following table.
	Data for 2009 will be available when Sentencing Statistics 2009 is published later this year.
	The Courts Proceeding database does not record information on reasons why these orders have been issued, other than the offence committed.
	Due to data quality issues we are unable to provide information on breaches. Work is currently under way to resolve this.
	The figures referred to in the response relate to stand alone community sentences only. Requirements similar to those of the stand alone orders which have been given as part of the generic community order are not included. The community order, which was brought in by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 is available for offenders 18 and over and whose offence was committed from April 2005.
	The drug treatment and testing order was replaced by the drug rehabilitation requirement of the community order under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, from April 2005, for offenders aged over 18.
	
		
			  Total number of drug treatment and testing orders issued for offenders aged 12 to 19, 2002-08 
			  Age  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 
			 12 - - - - - - - 
			 13 - - - - - - - 
			 14 0 (1)1 0 0 0 0 0 
			 15 0 0 0 0 0 (1)1 0 
			 16 20 30 14 11 5 4 1 
			 17 49 38 33 25 7 6 2 
			 18 92 104 142 54 6 3 1 
			 19 182 183 202 108 6 0 0 
			 (1) Drug treatment and testing orders are not available for offenders aged under 16. These records are likely to be data errors, resulting from incorrect recording of age or disposal.  Notes: 1. These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.  2. This data has been taken from the Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings database. This data is presented on the principal offence basis. Where an offender has been sentenced for more than one offence the principal offence is the one for which the heaviest sentence was imposed. Where the same sentence has been imposed for two or more offences the principal offence is the one for which the statutory maximum is most severe.  3. The figures referred to in the response relate to stand alone community sentences only. Requirements similar to those of the stand alone orders which have been given as part of the generic community order are not included. The Community Order, which was brought in by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 is available for offenders 18 and over and whose offence was committed from April 2005.

Young Offenders: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to the answer of 15 March 2007,  Official Report, column 563W, on young offenders, how many  (a) volunteers,  (b) (i) full-time and (ii) part-time practitioners,  (c) sessional staff,  (d) administration staff,  (e) managers,  (f) student and trainees and  (g) others were working for youth offending teams in each London borough in each year since 2002.

Maria Eagle: I have been asked to reply.
	The Youth Justice Board collects figures on the number and type of staff working at each Youth Offending Team at the beginning of each financial year. The table shows information from 2004-05 as this was the first year in which this data was collected. The figures include vacant posts.
	The table shows the figures on  (a) volunteers,  (b) (i) full-time and (ii) part-time practitioners,  (c) sessional staff, (d) administration staff,  (e) managers,  (f) student and trainees and  (g) others working at each Youth Offending Team at the beginning of each financial year.
	
		
			   a  b (i)  b (ii)  c  d  e  f  g  Total 
			  2008-09  
			 Barking and Dagenham 19 33 0 0 5 5 0 0 62 
			 Barnet 19 18 10 0 1 7 1 0 56 
			 Bexley 23 11 4 1 2 2 0 0 43 
			 Brent 0 25 2 0 7 8 1 0 43 
			 Bromley 24 26 3 8 7 5 0 0 73 
			 Camden 0 26 13 0 8 7 0 0 54 
			 Croydon 51 34 7 14 9 12 0 0 127 
			 Ealing 0 23 6 3 6 10 0 0 48 
			 Enfield 28 38 2 0 7 5 0 0 80 
			 Greenwich 0 22 9 0 9 9 0 0 49 
			 Hackney 0 64 5 0 14 9 0 0 92 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 50 34 2 4 8 6 2 0 106 
			 Haringey 30 42 7 7 19 5 0 0 110 
			 Harrow 40 17 8 12 7 4 1 0 89 
			 Havering 37 19 6 10 5 3 0 0 80 
			 Hillingdon 28 26 0 14 6 5 2 0 81 
			 Hounslow 19 21 6 26 7 6 0 0 85 
			 Islington 27 30 0 2 7 4 0 0 70 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 24 23 4 1 3 5 0 0 60 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames 0 9 2 0 2 4 0 0 17 
			 Lambeth 24 47 0 0 8 10 0 0 89 
			 Lewisham 42 34 9 1 8 5 0 0 99 
			 Merton 40 15 5 7 4 4 0 0 75 
			 Newham 0 56 1 0 9 12 0 0 78 
			 Redbridge 0 34 6 0 9 9 1 0 59 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 36 6 9 1 2 3 0 0 57 
			 Southwark 113 69 6 16 21 23 0 0 248 
			 Sutton 43 15 5 2 3 4 0 0 72 
			 Tower Hamlets and City of London 82 34 11 11 8 5 0 0 151 
			 Waltham Forest 0 29 0 8 7 5 0 0 49 
			 Wandsworth 26 21 7 17 6 6 1 0 84 
			 Westminster 0 28 2 2 6 6 0 0 44 
			  2007- 0 8  
			 Barking and Dagenham 40 31 4 22 5 7 2 0 111 
			 Barnet 25 12 7 2 2 5 0 0 53 
			 Bexley 22 14 6 1 3 2 0 0 48 
			 Brent 0 24 4 12 8 5 0 0 53 
			 Bromley 0 27 0 2 7 3 0 0 39 
			 Camden 0 32 6 2 8 5 0 0 53 
			 Croydon 42 39 0 12 8 7 1 0 109 
			 Ealing 33 29 2 10 8 4 0 0 86 
			 Enfield 28 35 2 0 10 4 0 0 79 
			 Greenwich 0 26 8 0 8 6 1 0 49 
			 Hackney 35 43 8 2 14 13 0 0 115 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 50 34 4 4 8 6 2 0 108 
			 Haringey 0 41 13 0 16 5 0 0 75 
			 Harrow 55 15 8 13 7 3 1 0 102 
			 Havering 31 19 5 12 4 3 0 0 74 
			 Hillingdon 47 25 1 16 4 5 1 0 99 
			 Hounslow 19 22 4 26 6 6 0 0 83 
			 Islington 0 23 2 6 5 5 0 0 41 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 25 22 4 0 3 5 1 0 60 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames 11 10 5 0 1 2 0 0 29 
			 Lambeth 54 43 2 9 12 9 0 0 129 
			 Lewisham 43 38 3 0 4 5 1 0 94 
			 Merton 50 15 3 5 3 4 2 0 82 
			 Newham 14 47 1 3 14 11 2 0 92 
			 Redbridge 0 30 6 0 9 10 2 0 57 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 99 7 8 4 1 4 0 0 123 
			 Southwark 113 90 6 16 21 6 4 0 256 
			 Sutton 35 13 7 0 2 4 1 0 62 
			 Tower Hamlets and City of London 51 20 1 8 11 4 0 0 95 
			 Waltham Forest 0 29 3 2 9 4 0 0 47 
			 Wandsworth 49 24 5 30 5 5 1 0 119 
			 Westminster 15 40 0 0 6 2 2 0 65 
			  2006-07  
			 Barking and Dagenham 16 29 1 22 6 6 1 0 81 
			 Barnet 32 17 4 12 4 3 2 0 74 
			 Bexley 22 15 4 2 3 2 0 0 48 
			 Brent 35 24 2 14 10 7 0 0 92 
			 Bromley 35 16 6 0 2 2 0 0 61 
			 Camden 0 29 9 1 8 5 2 0 54 
			 Croydon 48 36 1 19 8 7 0 0 119 
			 Ealing 34 23 4 12 6 4 1 0 84 
			 Enfield 23 32 2 0 10 3 0 0 70 
			 Greenwich 0 21 6 5 7 6 0 0 45 
			 Hackney 33 35 4 2 11 4 1 0 90 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 34 27 4 4 8 8 2 0 87 
			 Haringey 28 38 12 36 11 6 4 0 135 
			 Harrow 52 11 4 10 6 4 2 0 89 
			 Havering 39 18 7 20 5 3 0 0 92 
			 Hillingdon 47 25 0 11 5 5 1 0 94 
			 Hounslow 22 19 1 24 6 5 2 0 79 
			 Islington 0 23 2 6 5 5 0 0 41 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 17 20 2 6 5 3 1 0 54 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames 48 7 4 0 0 2 1 0 62 
			 Lambeth 55 46 1 0 14 3 0 0 119 
			 Lewisham 69 38 2 0 6 4 2 0 121 
			 Merton 35 13 2 0 3 3 2 0 58 
			 Newham 48 59 0 16 22 17 4 0 166 
			 Redbridge 0 28 7 0 10 8 1 0 54 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 66 7 10 4 2 2 1 0 92 
			 Southwark 113 74 6 16 21 6 5 0 241 
			 Sutton 118 15 3 0 2 4 0 0 142 
			 Tower Hamlets and City of London 37 24 1 13 9 4 2 0 90 
			 Waltham Forest 31 27 2 0 7 4 0 0 71 
			 Wandsworth 57 25 5 21 4 4 2 0 118 
			 Westminster 15 40 o 0 6 2 2 0 65 
			  2005-06  
			 Barking and Dagenham 12 26 6 16 7 7 1 0 75 
			 Barnet 2 1 16 3 4 2 13 0 41 
			 Bexley 13 15 3 2 3 2 1 0 39 
			 Brent 22 24 0 15 9 5 1 0 76 
			 Bromley 22 18 4 9 2 2 0 0 57 
			 Camden 0 23 6 3 8 5 4 0 49 
			 Croydon 38 31 2 18 8 7 0 0 104 
			 Ealing 0 23 12 7 6 3 0 0 51 
			 Enfield 0 17 2 11 11 3 0 0 44 
			 Greenwich 0 21 4 1 7 4 0 0 37 
			 Hackney 2 27 3 1 8 6 0 0 47 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 23 28 2 4 7 5 2 0 71 
			 Haringey 27 30 7 77 12 4 1 0 158 
			 Harrow 40 10 6 12 7 4 0 0 79 
			 Havering 18 17 2 8 4 2 1 0 52 
			 Hillingdon 24 21 1 12 3 3 0 0 64 
			 Hounslow 32 19 1 16 6 5 0 0 79 
			 Islington 25 21 1 4 5 3 0 0 59 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 26 20 2 2 3 3 0 0 56 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames 10 7 4 3 0 2 0 0 26 
			 Lambeth 0 38 1 0 9 4 0 0 52 
			 Lewisham 71 40 2 0 5 4 2 0 124 
			 Merton 36 10 2 0 2 5 2 0 57 
			 Newham 0 61 0 5 20 20 3 0 109 
			 Redbridge 0 25 5 1 9 9 0 0 49 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 113 10 10 11 3 4 1 0 152 
			 Southwark 106 64 6 20 20 6 4 0 226 
			 Sutton 104 12 2 0 3 4 0 0 125 
			 Tower Hamlets and City of London 22 22 0 12 7 5 3 0 71 
			 Waltham Forest 31 28 0 0 7 3 0 0 69 
			 Wandsworth 58 24 4 10 3 4 0 0 103 
			 Westminster 0 34 2 0 6 2 1 0 45 
			  2004-05  
			 Barking and Dagenham 0 18 0 8 4 3 0 0 33 
			 Barnet 1 2 3 4 12 2 2 0 26 
			 Bexley 5 15 3 4 2 2 0 0 31 
			 Brent 0 17 5 0 7 6 0 0 35 
			 Bromley 28 14 2 9 5 2 0 0 60 
			 Camden 16 21 9 0 5 4 2 0 57 
			 Croydon 123 27 6 0 7 4 0 0 167 
			 Ealing 0 23 12 7 6 3 0 0 51 
			 Enfield 45 27 2 0 7 4 0 0 85 
			 Greenwich 0 21 4 2 5 5 1 0 38 
			 Hackney 2 23 3 8 6 4 2 0 48 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 0 33 11 5 0 4 2 0 55 
			 Haringey 36 42 6 13 12 5 3 0 117 
			 Harrow 55 11 6 15 5 5 1 0 98 
			 Havering 28 20 0 10 4 2 1 0 65 
			 Hillingdon 18 17 3 11 3 3 0 0 55 
			 Hounslow 42 15 4 15 4 5 0 0 85 
			 Islington 62 22 2 4 6 5 6 0 107 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 16 17 1 1 4 4 0 0 43 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames 0 8 1 0 2 2 0 0 13 
			 Lambeth 49 36 3 35 11 13 2 0 149 
			 Lewisham 0 24 4 0 16 4 3 0 51 
			 Merton 44 16 1 0 3 2 0 0 66 
			 Newham 0 48 1 0 12 6 7 0 74 
			 Redbridge 0 30 0 0 8 5 1 0 44 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 67 10 9 5 2 2 0 0 95 
			 Southwark 0 61 4 0 17 4 5 0 91 
			 Sutton 0 10 5 0 2 3 0 0 20 
			 Tower Hamlets and City of London 25 21 0 11 7 5 1 0 70 
			 Waltham Forest 0 14 1 3 6 5 0 0 29 
			 Wandsworth 47 16 5 4 3 4 0 0 79 
			 Westminster 0 30 1 0 5 2 0 0 38

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Affordable Housing

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many  (a) local authorities and  (b) housing associations offer the Social Homebuy scheme; and what the aggregate size of their housing stock is.

Ian Austin: During 2009-10 there are 10 local authorities and 48 registered social landlords offering social homebuy. The total housing stock (as at April 2009) owned by these local authorities was 198,000 and the total stock owned by these RSLs (as at 31 March 2009) was 721,000. RSL stock includes that owned by subsidiaries where the parent RSL is offering social homebuy.
	 Sources:
	1. Stock figures are taken from local authority returns to the Business Plan Statistical Appendix for 2008-09:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housingresearch/housingstatistics/housingstatisticsby/localauthorityhousing/dataforms/hssa0809/bpsadata200809/
	2. Regulatory and Statistical Returns to the Tenant Services Authority for 2009:
	https://www.rsrsurvey.co.uk//

Allotments

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many allotment disposals have been approved by the Government Office responsible for allotment disposals in each local authority area since 1997.

Barbara Follett: A table providing data on the number of granted applications requesting consent to dispose of statutory allotments, from 1 January 2000 until 31December 2009 broken down by local authority area has been placed in the Library of the House. We do not hold complete data for years prior to 2000.

Arc Manche

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government with reference to the answer to the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst of 12 October 2009,  Official Report, column 307W, on Arc Manche, what bids have been made for funding for the Arc Manche Network and Assembly under the Interreg IV round.

Rosie Winterton: The Arc Manche Network and Assembly have made no specific bids for funding under the Interreg IV programmes.

Arc Manche

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government with reference to the answer to the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst of 12 October 2009,  Official Report, column 307W, on Arc Manche, if he will place in the Library a copy of each document associated with the bid and award of the £1.1 million grant to support the Arc Manche Network and Regional Assembly.

Rosie Winterton: The Department will place a copy of the Espace Manche Development Initiative bid documentation in the Library. The details of the award and grant offer letter are commercially in confident documents and are not available to us. These are held by the French Managing Authority based in Lille and Haute Normandie as Lead Partner for the Project.

Audit Commission: Official Hospitality

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough of 25 January 2010,  Official Report, column 561W, on the Audit Commission: procurement, who attended the Audit Commission's function held at the Reform Club.

Rosie Winterton: This is an operational matter for the Audit Commission and I have asked the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission to write to the hon. Member direct.
	 Letter from Steve Bundred, dated 25 March 2010:
	The event held at the Reform Club on 21 April 2008 was the Commission's 25tn anniversary event.
	Invitations were sent to key stakeholders and people who had played a significant part in the Commission's history. No list of those who actually attended the event exists.
	A copy of this letter will be placed in Hansard.

Audit Commission: Training

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough of 25 January 2010,  Official Report, column 561W, on the Audit Commission: procurement, what the purpose was of the extra driver tuition from the AA Driving School procured by the Audit Commission; and what the jobs were of those who received the training.

Rosie Winterton: This is an operational matter for the Audit Commission and I have asked the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission to write to the hon. Member direct.
	 Letter from Steve Bundred, dated 25 March 2010:
	The payments to the AA driving school relate to seven members of staff who attended one day advanced driver training courses. Two of the individuals are auditors, two are IT specialists and three are performance specialists.
	All seven members of staff drive a high number of business miles each year and all had been involved in car accidents whilst driving on Commission business. The purpose of the driving courses is to analyse and improve the skills of high risk drivers and attendance contributes to reducing insurance costs.
	A copy of this letter will be placed in Hansard.

Council Housing: Oldham

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether he has guaranteed to write off the whole of Oldham's outstanding housing debt in the event of the stock transfer ballot being won; when a decision on this matter was taken; and what form that decision took.

Ian Austin: Government are committed to clearing the attributable housing debt of Oldham council if its tenants vote in favour of transfer. The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), which has responsibility for the delivery of the housing transfer programme, completed its assessment of Oldham's transfer application in October 2009.
	The HCA was satisfied that the transfer proposals, including the indicative Overhanging debt total, met the necessary criteria as set out in guidance. Accordingly, the HCA recommended that Oldham be given a place on the transfer programme. In his written ministerial statement of December 2009, the Housing Minister agreed a place on the programme for Oldham, enabling the council to proceed to Stage One of the tenant consultation process.

Council Tax

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which local authority area had the lowest Band D outturn bill, including all precepts, in each year since 1997-98.

Barbara Follett: Details of the average Band D council tax in each local authority area in England in each year since 1997-98 are available on the Communities and Local Government website at:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/localregional/localgovernmentfinance/statistics/counciltax/

Council Tax

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what cap he plans to put in place in respect of council tax increases in 2010-11.

Barbara Follett: I refer the hon. Member to the written ministerial statement I have made today.

Departmental Termination of Employment

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much his Department spent on  (a) flexible and  (b) compulsory early severance for staff at each grade at his Department's headquarters in (i) each financial year since 2004-05 and (ii) 2009-10; and in respect of how many staff at each grade severance arrangements of each type were made in each year.

Barbara Follett: The following table shows the amount the Department spent on compulsory early severance in the financial years 2006-07 to 2008-09.
	
		
			  £ 
			   2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 AA - 51,848 409,371 
			 AO 271,875 399,341 62,760 
			 EO 996,821 1,142,191 86,915 
			 HEO 1,822,327 1,411,960 138,928 
			 SEO 670,969 722,032 13,851 
			 Grade 7 757,784 307,937 - 
			 Grade 6 129,424 - - 
			 SCS 136,557 - 183,054 
			 Total 4,785,757 4,035,309 894,879 
		
	
	The following table shows the number of staff who left the Department on compulsory early severance in the financial years 2006-07 to 2008-09.
	
		
			   2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 AA - 1 8 
			 AO 7 8 1 
			 EO 21 18 1 
			 HEO 25 17 2 
			 SEO 6 6 1 
			 Grade 7 6 4 - 
			 Grade 6 2 - - 
			 SCS 1 - 1 
			 Total 68 54 14 
		
	
	There were no staff who left the Department on flexible early severance in the financial years 2006-07 to 2008-09.
	Communities and Local Government came into existence on 5 May 2006 and information about compulsory or flexible early severance before to this date can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	We are unable to provide details for the current financial year 2009-10 as the figures have not yet been produced in their final form.

Departmental Termination of Employment

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much his Department spent on  (a) flexible and  (b) compulsory early retirement for staff at each grade at his Department's headquarters in (i) each financial year since 2004-05 and (ii) 2009-10; and how many staff at each grade took each type of retirement in each year.

Barbara Follett: The following table shows the amount the Department spent on compulsory early retirement in the financial years 2006-07 to 2008-09.
	
		
			  £ 
			   2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 AA - 8,990 131,433 
			 AO 149,733 116,859 - 
			 EO 215,454 77,655 20,571 
			 HEO 635,800 166,882 45,766 
			 SEO 431,587 110,952 - 
			 Grade 7 482,031 254,341 120,677 
			 Grade 6 197,165 25,661 - 
			 SCS 1,154,201 994,597 614,940 
			 Total 3,265,971 1,755,937 933,387 
		
	
	The following table shows the number of staff who left the Department on compulsory early retirement in the financial years 2006-07 to 2008-09
	
		
			   2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 AA - 1 3 
			 AO 10 10 - 
			 EO 12 6 2 
			 HEO 21 9 2 
			 SEO 17 7 - 
			 Grade 7 17 9 3 
			 Grade 6 5 1 - 
			 SCS 6 - - 
			 Total 88 43 10 
		
	
	The following table shows the amount the Department spent on flexible early retirement and the number of staff who left under these terms in the financial years 2006-07 to 2008-09.
	
		
			  £ 
			   2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 AA - - 16,336 
			 Total - - 16,336 
			 Number of staff - - 1 
			 Total - - 1 
		
	
	The Department for Communities and Local Government came into existence on 5 May 2006 and information about compulsory or flexible early retirements prior to this date can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	We are unable to provide details for the current financial year 2009-10 as the year end figures have not yet been completed.

Disadvantage: Greater London

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the value was of each indicator in the  (a) income,  (b) employment,  (c) health,  (d) education,  (e) barriers to housing and services,  (f) crime and  (g) living environment domain of the indices of deprivation for each London borough in each year since 2000.

Rosie Winterton: The indices of deprivation 2007 and 2004 (ID 2007 and ID 2004) were constructed at Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) level. LSOAs are consistent in size and over time, and allow identification of small pockets of deprivation. This also overcomes difficulties in producing statistics for electoral wards associated with frequent boundary changes. There are 32,482 LSOAs in England.
	Domains within the Indices of Deprivation are independent dimensions of multiple deprivation, each with their own impact on multiple deprivation relative to its importance. In the ID2004 and ID2007 the overall IMD was constructed by combining the individual domain indices using explicit weights, driven by theoretical considerations and research into the issue of weighting carried out by the University of St. Andrews (Dibben et al., 2007(1)). The weightings are as follows:
	
		
			   Domain weight (percentage) 
			 Income Deprivation 22.5 
			 Employment Deprivation 22.5 
			 Health Deprivation and Disability 13.5 
			 Education, Skills and Training Deprivation 13.5 
			 Barriers to Housing and Services 9.3 
			 Crime 9.3 
			 Living Environment Deprivation 9.3 
		
	
	Six summary measures of the Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2007 and 2004 have been produced at both local authority district and unitary authority levels. The summary measures at district level focus on different aspects of multiple deprivation in the area. The six measures are Average Score, Average Rank, Extent, Local Concentration, Income Scale, and Employment Scale.
	(1) Dibben, C, Atherton, I., Cox, M., Watson, V., Ryan, M. and Sutton, M. (2007) Investigating the Impact of Changing the Weights that Underpin the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004, London: Communities and Local Government
	ID2007 and the local authority summaries can be found here:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/communities/neighbourhoodrenewal/deprivation/deprivation07/
	ID2004 and the local authority summaries can be found here:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/archived/general-content/communities/indicesofdeprivation/216309/
	Statistics for the indices of deprivation 2000 (ID 2000) were produced for each of the 8,414 wards in England and then summarised by district. They are available to download here:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/archived/general-content/communities/indicesofdeprivation/indicesofdeprivation/

Empty Property: Council Tax

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of the council tax discount in respect of empty homes in each year since 2004.

Barbara Follett: No estimate is available.

European Regional Development Fund

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 6 January 2010,  Official Report, column 366W, on the European Regional Development Fund, if he will place in the Library a copy of each audit report on an English European Regional Development Fund programme which has been produced in the last 24 months.

Rosie Winterton: The European Court of Auditors and European Commission have produced three audit reports on 2000-06 English ERDF programmes in the last 24 months. However, these reports contain classified financial information about individual organisations and it would be inappropriate for me to place copies of the reports in the Library.

European Regional Development Fund

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much had been paid in fines consequent on irregularities relating to the European Regional Development Fund programme since 1997 at the latest date for which figures are available; and what his most recent estimate is of the contingent liabilities in respect of such irregularities.

Rosie Winterton: The Commission does not impose fines on member states in relation to irregularities found during the course of applying management controls to the administration of European Regional Development Funds (ERDF). It does apply Financial Corrections where, in its view, those management controls have not met the high standard they require. These are estimated to remove that element of funds not subject to audit that might have been found to be irregular.
	The only Financial Correction applied to the 2000-2006 ERDF programmes was imposed on the NW Objective 2 and URBAN programmes for failures in management control (Article 4 of regulation (EC) 438/2001). This amounted to €30,886,153. The total value of the programmes is €860,000,000.
	The latest estimate of contingent liabilities arising from possible Financial Corrections and other disallowances was published in the recent Spring Supplementary Estimates as £113,450,000. My Department will be reviewing this figure in the context of the 2009-2010 resource accounts to be published in June.

Government Office for London: Expenditure

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the programme expenditure of the Government Office for London was in each year since 1996-97.

Rosie Winterton: The information requested is set out in the following table:
	
		
			  £ million 
			   Allocations/ delegations issued to GOL  European Programmes  Grants to GLA  Total 
			 1998-99 - - - l,440 
			 1999-00 - - - 2,202 
			 2000-01 - - - l,605 
			 2001-02 - - - 2,094 
			 2002-03 - - - 2,530 
			 2003-04 - - - 2,724 
			 2004-05 - - - 3,323 
			 2005-06 211 105 2,218 2,534 
			 2006-07 193 92 2,428 2,713 
			 2007-08 108 66 2,559 2,732 
			 2008-09 29 72 48 148 
			 2009-10 20 0 48 68 
			  Notes: 1 We do not hold figures for 1996-1997 and 1997-1998 and do not have a breakdown of expenditure prior to 2005-06. 2. Since 2008-09, funding for the Greater London Authority for TfL and the LDA, which GOL had administered since 2000, is now directly administered by DFT and BIS. 3. From 2009-10 responsibility for European Programmes was transferred to the Greater London Authority. 4. The figures for 2009-10 are allocations rather than expenditure. 5. All figures are rounded.

Government Offices for the Regions: Finance

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what the  (a) running cost and  (b) aggregate programme expenditure was of the Government Office for each region in 2009-10;
	(2)  pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Falmouth and Camborne of 24 February 2010,  Official Report, column 611W, on Government Offices for the Regions: finance, what the aggregate monetary value was of programme budgets in the most recent year for which figures are available.

Rosie Winterton: The information requested is as follows:
	
		
			  £ 
			   2009-10 
			  Regional Government Office  Projected running (admin) costs expenditure  Projected Aggregate programme expenditure 
			 GO North East 8,673,300 8,966,485 
			 GO North West 11,051,400 37,135,586 
			 GO Yorkshire and Humber 9,049,700 24,492,668 
			 GO West Midlands 11,373,700 12,353,792 
			 GO East Midlands 7,856,600 7,856,265 
			 GO East 8,899,400 13,760,080 
			 GO South East 10,139,500 9,935,892 
			 GO South West 9,625,000 6,403,683 
			 GO London 11,051,100 68,242,781 
		
	
	Programme figures relate solely to programmes which are administered by the GOs on behalf of the 12 sponsoring Departments.
	Projected aggregate programme expenditure for 2009-10 excludes European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) expenditure. The details of the ERDF 2000-06 expenditure defrayed in 2009-10 will not be available until September 2010, at the earliest, after the audits are completed by the Director General for Regional Policy-European Commission. ERDF expenditure for 2007-13 is administered by the Regional Development Agency's (RDAs).

Government Offices for the Regions: Finance

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the administration costs of the Government Offices for the Regions were in each year since 1996-97.

Rosie Winterton: The information requested is shown in the following table.
	From 2001-02 the Government Office Network changed the way it accounted for corporate service administration budgets centralising the Information Communication Technology budgets rather than them being managed by the individual Government Offices. Further centralisation of budgets took place for Learning and Development in 2007-08 and Estates from 2008-09.
	
		
			  Government Office Administrative Running Costs: GO outturn expenditure from 1996-07 to 200809 and projected outturn expenditure from 2009-10 
			 Government Office  1996-97  1997-98  1998-99  1999-2000  2000-01  2001-02  2002-03 
			 North East 8,687.15 8,616.75 8,618.84 8,312.05 8,197.33 9,002.29 9,954.46 
			 North West¹ 9,839.09 9,442.59 13,690.13 13,048.58 13,651.03 15,344.87 15,523.52 
			 Merseyside¹ 4,349.95 4,199.53 12.24 - - - - 
			 Yorks and Humber 8,765.04 8,475.01 8,683.92 8,888.68 9,357.48 10,036.85 10,943.77 
			 West Midlands 10,040.37 9,757.79 9,474.35 9,330.15 9,960.76 10,295.51 10,662.85 
			 East Midlands 6,616.67 6,436.24 6,754.39 6,951.28 7,335.77 8,244.80 8,713.24 
			 East 6,168.97 6,270.62 6,269.43 7,005.47 7,542.48 8,631.95 9,355.85 
			 South West 7,140.74 6,825.73 6,985.03 7,796.87 8,711.38 10,666.90 11,860.77 
			 South East 8,406.18 8,544.99 8,561.40 8,658.61 9,477.26 10,326.44 10,874.74 
			 London 14,106.47 13,458.82 13,238.12 13,715.79 13,860.98 13,161.20 14,038.84 
			 Corporate Services² 1,696.34 4,355.96 3,095.29 3,702.74 4,732.81 9,507.95 7,531.60 
			 Total 85,816.97 86,384.03 85,383.14 87,410.22 92,827.28 105,218.76 109,459.64 
		
	
	
		
			 Projected 
			  Government Office  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09  2009-10 
			 North East 12,167.24 13,887.09 13,138.16 12,730.25 11,826.45 10,178.90 8,673.30 
			 North West¹ 16,808.94 17,777.86 17,745.45 16,933.67 16,095.53 12,184.09 11,051.40 
			 Merseyside¹ - - - - - - - 
			 Yorks and Humber 12,480.23 13,453.18 13,494.30 10,676.64 13,447.21 8,922.60 9,049.70 
			 West Midlands 13,381.47 15,286.08 14,497.15 14,925.87 15,000.75 10,834.07 11,373.70 
			 East Midlands 11,153.67 11,937.13 12,530.66 11,490.17 10,857.39 8,873.74 7,856.60 
			 East 12,841.51 15,075.61 13,296.12 12,211.64 11,398.50 9,109.56 8,899.40 
			 South West 13,960.23 14,724.92 14,823.08 13,677.13 13,763.68 10,461.02 9,625.00 
			 South East 14,099.03 14,372.51 14,624.51 14,570.49 13,105.84 10,559.56 10,139.50 
			 London 16,654.91 18,870.09 18,483.70 17,595.20 16,198.99 11,811.52 11,051.10 
			 Corporate services² 14,988.76 13,389.19 14,693.52 16,348.41 16,743.70 39,217.91 37,230.04 
			 Total 138,535.98 148,773.66 147,326.65 141,159.47 138,438.04 132,152.97 124,949.74 
			 ¹ GO-North West and GO-Merseyside merged during 1998-1999. ² From 2001-02 the Government Office Network changed the way it accounted for corporate service administration budgets centralising the Information Communication Technology budgets rather than them being managed by the individual Government Offices. Further centralisation of budgets took place for Learning and Development in 2007-08 and Estates from 2008-09.

Joint Improvement Partnerships

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the  (a) purpose and  (b) function of (i) Joint Improvement and (ii) Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships is; and in which regions Joint Improvement Partnerships have been established.

Rosie Winterton: The National Improvement and Efficiency Strategy, published in December 2007, set out the agreement with the sector that RIEPs would:
	commit to supporting councils and partnerships in difficulty, ensuring resources are devoted to prevention and support;
	focus resources on supporting innovation and efficiency as a means of delivering excellent LAAs;
	establish strong governance arrangements that ensure strong member leadership of and engagement in the RIEP and ownership of the strategy by all members in the region;
	base their regional improvement and efficiency strategy on a robust analysis of need across the region, using both data and consultation to develop the strategy; and
	report annually to councils and partnerships in the region and the LGA-Government-Chief Executives' Task Group governance structure, accounting for the distribution and use of funding and progress against priorities, and providing reassurance that these minimum standards are being met.
	Supported by RIEPs and the Department of Health, the Joint Improvement Partnerships (JIPs) seek to improve adult health and social care provision through partnership working between local authorities, NHS, the voluntary and community sector, other partner organisations, and people who use services and carers. There is a JIP in every English region, and they help to share information, learning and skills; support collaborative project work; and, contribute towards workforce development in the adult social care sector.

Local Authority Business Growth Incentives Scheme

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding under the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive scheme has been allocated to each  (a) region and  (b) local authority area in each year from 2005-06; and how much such funding he expects to be allocated under the scheme in 2010-11.

Barbara Follett: For the period 2005-06 to 2007-08, £1 billion was allocated to LABGI: £935 million to England and £65 million to Wales. The National Assembly for Wales has been responsible for distribution of its LABGI allocation. The Government distributed LABGI grant in England totalling £50 million in 2009-10; and has recently indicated that it also intends to distribute the same total amount in England in 2010-11.
	 (a) In England, the Government have given the following total regional LABGI grants each year:
	
		
			  £ 
			   2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09  2009-10 
			 East England 9,651,270 31,897,413 10,245,115 40,608,231 5,914,554 
			 East Midlands 11,217,878 34,318,221 10,238,250 34,839,244 4,228,280 
			 London 17,260,775 46,877,642 12,878,283 68,019,603 10,734,393 
			 North East 8,282,619 25,326,820 5,165,671 34,893,787 2,116,631 
			 North West 18,214,154 55,790,645 10,535,099 50,954,372 5,976,589 
			 South East 14,054,485 32,183,210 14,274,492 41,615,272 8,400,294 
			 South West 9,690,211 24,213,062 6,592,029 40,853,396 4,957,132 
			 West Midlands 11,747,907 36,982,240 10,370,939 42,606,972 4,075,071 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 15,336,497 40,414,553 11,852,639 41,803,297 3,597,065 
		
	
	(b) The Government have published details of the final allocations to local authorities in England in Grant Determinations, which can be viewed on the Communities and Local Government website at:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/local governmentfinance/labgi/
	and
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/localgovernmentfinance/labgi/labgischeme2/
	The main Grant Determinations can be viewed at:
	05/06 Grant Determination (No 1) 2006 [No 31/233] (7 February 2006)
	http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/labgi/dtmn0506.pdf
	05/06 Grant Determination (No 2) 2006 [No 31/249] (27 February 2006)
	http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/labgi/dtmn0506v2.pdf
	05/06 Grant Determination (No 3) 2006 [No 31/491] (19 July 2006)
	http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/labgi/dtmn0506v3.pdf
	06/07 Grant Determination 2007 [No 31/554] (27 February 2007)
	http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/labgi/dtmn0607.pdf
	06/07 Grant Determination (no 2) 2007 [No 31/892] (6 September 2007)
	http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/labgi/dtmncode20.pdf
	07/08 Grant Determination (No 2) 2008 [31/1238] (26 June 2008)
	http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/labgi/seconddtmn0708.pdf
	Grant Determination 2009 [No 31/1287] (23 February 2009)
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/LABusGrowIS
	Grant Determination 2009 (no 2) (no 31/1640) (25 September 2009)
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/local government/labgidetermination20092

Local Government

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 3 March 2010,  Official Report, column 1239W, on local government, if he will issue guidance to local authority monitoring officers on visits by hon. Members to local authority-owned premises and facilities  (a) outside and  (b) inside election purdah periods.

Rosie Winterton: The Secretary of State has no plans to issue guidance to local authority monitoring officers on visits by hon. Members to premises and facilities owned by local authorities. Local authority members are required by their council's statutory Code of Conduct to ensure their council's resources are not used improperly for political purposes (including party political purposes).

Local Government Finance

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether the public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities in clause 1 of the Equality Bill will apply to his Department when it is allocating local government grants.

Michael Jabez Foster: I have been asked to reply.
	The Government Equalities Office leads on the Equality Bill.
	The duty will apply to decisions of a strategic nature. As we made clear in our guide to the duty, we would expect central government departments to have regard to the duty, alongside other considerations, when making strategic funding decisions.

Local Government: Complaints

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many complaints have been  (a) submitted to and  (b) upheld by in whole or in part the Local Government Ombudsman in each year since 1996.

Rosie Winterton: The following table shows the number of complaints submitted each year and the number of complaints in each year on which either a local settlement was reached or the Ombudsman issued a report finding maladministration.
	
		
			   Complaints submitted  Complaint settled locally or reported on by Ombudsman 
			 1996-97 15,322 2,752 
			 1997-98 14,969 2,694 
			 1998-99 15,869 2,624 
			 1999-2000 17,555 3,060 
			 2000-01 19,179 3,945 
			 2001-02 18,309 4,331 
			 2002-03 17,610 3,857 
			 2003-04 18,982 3,363 
			 2004-05 18,698 3,042 
			 2005-06 18,626 2,962 
			 2006-07 18,320 3,088 
			 2007-08 17,628 3,057 
			 2008-09 21,012 2,885

Local Government: Equality

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what assessment he has made of the effect of Clause 1 of the Equality Bill on the allocation of local funding  (a) by central government to local government and  (b) by local authorities to individual wards and neighbourhoods.

Michael Jabez Foster: I have been asked to reply.
	The Government Equalities Office leads on the Equality Bill.
	The public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities will apply to decisions of a strategic nature. As we made clear in our guide to the duty, we would expect central government departments to have regard to the duty, alongside other considerations, when making strategic funding decisions.
	The guide also makes clear that we would expect local authorities to have regard to the duty when drawing up their key plans and strategies. However, whether the duty is relevant to any particular local funding decision will be for the local authority to decide.

Local Government: Per Capita Costs

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 16 December 2009,  Official Report, columns 1292-3W, on local government: per capita costs, what the average central Government grant per capita was to  (a) district councils,  (b) unitary councils,  (c) county councils,  (d) metropolitan councils,  (e) London boroughs,  (f) police authorities and  (g) fire authorities in each year since 1997-98 in real terms in 2009 prices.

Barbara Follett: The average central Government grant per capita for the classes of authority specified since 1997-98 in real terms at 2008-09 prices is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  £ per head 
			   1997-98  1998-99  1999-2000  2000-01  2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 District councils 85 79 79 80 82 82 89 83 86 96 96 98 
			 Unitary councils 786 806 843 898 936 962 1,081 1,084 1,132 1,144 1,161 1,201 
			 County councils 651 607 632 677 709 720 786 808 839 844 863 889 
			 Metropolitan councils 877 921 969 1,029 1,082 1,107 1,247 1,289 1,344 1,358 1,375 1,414 
			 London boroughs 1,043 1,072 1,113 1,169 1,214 1,230 1,346 1,371 1,419 1,430 1,452 1,473 
			 Police authorities(1) 152 153 153 134 139 138 143 144 147 143 145 145 
			 Fire authorities(2,3) 15 16 16 11 11 11 11 26 26 23 23 23 
			 (1) From 2000-01 onwards Metropolitan Police Authority data are collected within Greater London Authority. Hence separate data are not available. (2) From 2000-01 onwards London Fire and Civil Defence Authority data are collected within Greater London Authority. Hence separate data are not available. (3) From 2004-05 onwards Combined Fire Authorities (CFA) became precepting authorities.  Notes: 1. The definition of central Government grant used here is the sum of Formula Grant (Revenue Support Grant, Redistributed Non-Domestic Rates and Police Grant), Greater London Authority (GLA) grant and specific grants inside Aggregate External Finance (AEF), i.e. Revenue Grants paid for council's core services. In past years, where applicable the SSA reduction grant and Central Support Protection Grants have also been included. From 2008-09 it also includes Area Based Grant (ABG). 2. Figures exclude grants outside AEF (i.e. where funding is not for authorities' core services, but is passed to a third party, for example, rent allowances and rebates), capital grants, funding for the local authorities' housing management responsibilities and those grant programmes (such as European funding) where authorities are simply one of the recipients of funding paid towards an area. 3. Per capita figures are calculated using Office for National Statistics' (ONS) Mid-Year Population estimates from 1997 to 2008. 4. The real terms figures are calculated using the latest HM Treasury GDP deflators. 5. From 2000-01 onwards Metropolitan Police Authority and London Fire and Civil Defence Authority data are collected within Greater London Authority returns. Hence separate data are not available. 6. From 2004-05 Combined Fire Authorities (CFA) became precepting authorities. Prior to this CFAs levied on county councils' budget requirements. 7. Comparison across years may not be valid owing to changing local authority responsibilities.

Local Government: Public Consultation

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which local authorities offer community kitties to local residents.

Barbara Follett: We do not require local authorities to report on this, but according to the Participatory Budgeting Unit, who collate information on our behalf, 63 top tier local area agreement (LAA) areas use some form of participatory budgeting. For details of those who are carrying out participatory budgeting, I refer the hon. Member to an answer I gave her on 12 January 2010,  Official Report, column 890-92W.

Local Government: Devon and Norfolk

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what his plans are for the implementation of  (a) the draft Exeter and Devon (Structural Changes) Order 2010 and  (b) the draft Norwich and Norfolk (Structural Changes) Order 2010.

Rosie Winterton: Following the approval by this House and the other place of the draft orders implementing unitary councils for Exeter and Norwich, I informed the House yesterday,  Official Report, columns 38-41WS, that the Government had concluded it was right to proceed in making those orders, and that we intended to do so as soon as practicable. The orders were subsequently made yesterday and have come into force today.

Local Government: Translation Services

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much was spent on translation services by local authorities in  (a) Ribble Valley,  (b) Lancashire and  (c) England in each of the last five years.

Barbara Follett: The information is not collected centrally.

Non-Domestic Rates

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government with reference to his Department's publication of February 2010, Number of hereditaments benefiting from Small Business Rate Relief and the number of empty hereditaments, what his latest estimate is of the number and proportion of eligible small firms who do not claim small business rate relief.

Barbara Follett: Local authorities estimated that 462,000 hereditaments were benefiting from Small Business Rate Relief (SBRR) on December 2008. By applying that figure to the eligibility estimates made for the 2005 rating list it is estimated that around 80 per cent. of eligible hereditaments were claiming SBRR in 2008-09 - see table 1. This estimate suggests that around 20 per cent. or 113,000 of eligible hereditaments are not claiming SBRR. However, relief granted to small businesses has been increasing since SBRR was introduced-from £202 million in 2005-06 to £298 million in 2008-09. This represents a real terms increase of 34 per cent. Furthermore in 2008-09, 92 per cent. of the total relief that would be paid if all those estimated to be eligible were to claim, was actually being paid - see table 2.
	
		
			  Table 1: Take-up of SBRR - numbers claiming 
			   2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 Number of hereditaments actually claiming SBRR (thousand) 396 433 462 
			 Number of hereditaments estimated to be occupied by eligible small businesses (thousand) 575 575 575 
			 Percentage of estimated eligible actually claiming: 69 75 80 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Take-up of SBRR 2005-06 to 2008-09 - relief 
			   2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09 
			 Total relief that would be paid out if all properties estimated to be occupied by eligible small businesses were to claim(1) (£ million) 295 300 315 325 
			 Relief actually claimed: (£ million) 202 237 259 £98 
			 Percentage take-up(2) (%) 69 78 83 92 
			 (1) For details of how this estimate was made please see the paper Small business rate relief-improving evidence on eligibility and take-up: Methodology (2) Percentage of total relief, which would be paid if all eligible small businesses claimed it, that was actually paid

Non-Domestic Rates

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many hereditaments are  (a) above the rateable value threshold for small business rate relief,  (b) below the rateable value for small business rate relief but not occupied by eligible small businesses,  (c) below the rateable value threshold for small business rate relief and occupied by an eligible small business claiming the relief and  (d) below the rateable value threshold for small business rate relief and occupied by a eligible small business not claiming relief in each region; what estimate he has made of the monetary value of small business rate relief available to each eligible firm claiming the relief in each region; and how much has been claimed in small business rate relief by businesses in each region in 2009-10 to date.

Barbara Follett: The information is as follows:
	 (a) The number of hereditaments above the rateable value threshold for Small Business Rate Relief by region on the 2005 Rating List are shown in the following table. These numbers are consistent with the statistical release titled Non-domestic rateable values: 2010 Local Ratings Lists-England and Wales published on 18 December 2009.
	
		
			  Government office region  Number of hereditaments above the rateable value threshold( 1)  for SBRR on 2005 Rating List 
			 North East 18,000 
			 North West 59,000 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 41,000 
			 East Midlands 35,000 
			 West Midlands 47,000 
			 East of England 51,000 
			 London 81,000 
			 South East 79,000 
			 South West 42,000 
			 Total 453,000 
			 (1) Hereditaments with a rateable value over £15,000 or £21,500 in London 
		
	
	 (b),  (c) and  (d) The report Small Business Rate Relief-improving evidence on eligibility and take-up was published on 9 December 2009 and it estimates that of the approximately 1.2 million non-domestic properties in England which fall below the current rateable value (RV) thresholds for SBRR, around 575,000 are occupied by eligible small businesses. This report has been validated by an independent peer review and is available at
	http://www.communities.gov.uk
	This methodology can only be applied nationally for England as a whole. Therefore it is not possible to calculate an estimate of eligibility of small business rate relief by region.
	No estimate has been made of the monetary value of small business rate relief in each eligible firm in each region claiming the relief.
	The amount of small business rate relief is collected from local authorities on a financial year basis. Therefore it is not possible to provide figures on how much small business rate relief has been claimed in 2009-10 to date. The amount of small business rate relief claimed by businesses in each region in 2009-10 will be available following the publication of the Statistical Release on National non-domestic rates collected by local authorities in England 2009-10 later this year.

Non-Domestic Rates: Empty Property

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what estimate has been made of the number of properties on which empty property business rate relief was claimed in each region in 2009.

Barbara Follett: Details of the number of properties on which empty property business rate relief was claimed in each region in England as at 31 December 2008, the latest date for which data are available, are given in the following table:
	
		
			   Number of properties claiming empty property relief as at 31 December 2008 (Thousand) 
			 North East 7.6 
			 North West 27.6 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 17.1 
			 East Midlands 12.2 
			 West Midlands 18.2 
			 East of England 15.0 
			 London 20.8 
			 South East 15.8 
			 South West 13.6 
			 Total England 147.9 
		
	
	Data as at 31 December 2009 will be available later in 2010.

Planning Permission

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will end the requirements made by the density targets in Planning Policy Statement 3.

Ian Austin: The density target in Planning Policy Statement 3 is an indicative target rather than a prescriptive one and it allows for flexibility where needed. PPS3 states that local planning authorities may wish to set out a range of densities across the plan area rather than one broad density range although 30 dwellings per hectare net should be used as a national indicative minimum to guide policy development and decision-making, until local density policies are in place. PPS3 goes on to say that where local authorities wish to plan for, or agree to, densities below this minimum, this will need to be justified.

Recycling: Conferences

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will place in the Library a copy of the speaking notes and accompanying materials used by the Audit Commission speaker at the Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee Conference in 2008.

Rosie Winterton: This is an operational matter for the Audit Commission and I have asked the chief executive of the Audit Commission to write to the hon. Member direct.
	 Letter from Steve Bundred, dated 25 March 2010:
	Your Parliamentary Question outlined above has been passed to me to reply.
	A copy of the information requested has been placed in the House of Commons Library. The presentation referred to the Audit Commission report Well Disposed, which can be found on our website at:
	www.audit-commission.gov.uk/nationalstudies/localgov/Pages/welldisposed.aspx
	A copy of this letter will be placed in Hansard.

Right to Buy Scheme

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the average right to buy discount was  (a) in cash terms,  (b) in real terms in 2010 prices and  (c) as a proportion of the market value of the property in (i) England and (ii) each Government Office Region in England in each year since 1996-97.

Ian Austin: The average right to buy discount in cash terms and real term and as a proportion of the market value of the property in England and its regions are shown in the table. Figures are not available prior to 1998-09 and the discounts in real terms are presented in 2008-09 prices in line with the latest GDP deflator series.
	
		
			   Average RTB discount per dwelling (cash terms)  Average RTB discount per dwelling (in real terms)  Average RTB discount as a percentage of market value 
			  North East
			 1998-99 14,490 18,469 48 
			 1999-2000 10,670 13,337 47 
			 2000-01 12,590 15,533 47 
			 2001-02 11,680 14,096 46 
			 2002-03 13,240 15,479 45 
			 2003-04 14,850 16,885 42 
			 2004-05 18,800 20,798 34 
			 2005-06 21,140 22,959 34 
			 2006-07 21,010 22,162 31 
			 2007-08 21,460 22,001 28 
			 2008-09 21,650 21,650 29 
			 
			  North West
			 1998-99 16,510 21,043 48 
			 1999-2000 16,670 20,837 48 
			 2000-01 16,700 20,604 47 
			 2001-02 17,230 20,793 46 
			 2002-03 18,200 21,278 45 
			 2003-04 19,460 22,127 43 
			 2004-05 21,370 23,641 41 
			 2005-06 23,590 25,619 37 
			 2006-07 24,580 25,927 34 
			 2007-08 25,210 25,846 32 
			 2008-09 25,370 25,370 32 
			 
			  Yorkshire and the Humber
			 1998-99 15,650 19,947 47 
			 1999-2000 15,650 19,562 47 
			 2000-01 15,630 19,284 46 
			 2001-02 16,260 19,623 46 
			 2002-03 16,270 19,021 44 
			 2003-04 18,110 20,592 43 
			 2004-05 20,250 22,402 40 
			 2005-06 22,550 24,490 35 
			 2006-07 23,030 24,292 31 
			 2007-08 23,740 24,339 28 
			 2008-09 23,050 23,050 29 
			 
			  East Midlands
			 1998-99 18,260 23,274 50 
			 1999-2000 16,740 20,924 46 
			 2000-01 17,100 21,097 45 
			 2001-02 17,830 21,517 43 
			 2002-03 21,390 25,007 41 
			 2003-04 21,820 24,810 wok 
			 2004-05 22,420 24,803 35 
			 2005-06 22,770 24,729 31 
			 2006-07 23,600 24,894 28 
			 2007-08 23,850 24,452 27 
			 2008-09 23,860 23,860 29 
			 
			  West Midlands
			 1998-99 18,230 23,236 49 
			 1999-2000 18,470 23,087 48 
			 2000-01 19,960 24,626 49 
			 2001-02 19,840 23,943 47 
			 2002-03 20,330 23,768 44 
			 2003-04 22,580 25,675 40 
			 2004-05 23,930 26,474 34 
			 2005-06 25,060 27,216 33 
			 2006-07 25,050 26,423 30 
			 2007-08 25,620 26,266 30 
			 2008-09 25,820 25,820 30 
			 
			  East
			 1998-99 25,020 31,890 49 
			 1999-2000 27,350 34,187 47 
			 2000-01 27,300 33,682 45 
			 2001-02 27,830 33,586 43 
			 2002-03 30,360 35,494 39 
			 2003-04 31,360 35,658 35 
			 2004-05 32,580 36,043 33 
			 2005-06 33,250 36,110 30 
			 2006-07 33,020 34,830 27 
			 2007-08 33,790 34,643 25 
			 2008-09 33,960 33,960 25 
			 
			  London
			 1998-99 34,070 43,425 53 
			 1999-2000 36,150 45,186 51 
			 2000-01 37,140 45,822 48 
			 2001-02 36,990 44,640 42 
			 2002-03 35,960 42,041 37 
			 2003-04 37,190 42,287 32 
			 2004-05 35,490 39,262 28 
			 2005-06 30,280 32,885 22 
			 2006-07 21,150 22,309 14 
			 2007-08 20,710 21,233 13 
			 2008-09 20,990 20,990 10 
			 
			  South East
			 1998-99 29,780 37,957 50 
			 1999-2000 30,760 38,449 47 
			 2000-01 31,060 38,321 44 
			 2001-02 32,640 39,390 42 
			 2002-03 34,510 40,346 39 
			 2003-04 36,200 41,161 35 
			 2004-05 36,640 40,535 32 
			 2005-06 36,850 40,020 30 
			 2006-07 36,500 38,501 28 
			 2007-08 36,880 37,811 26 
			 2008-09 36,690 36,690 26 
			 
			  South West
			 1998-99 21,230 27,059 50 
			 1999-2000 21,670 27,087 48 
			 2000-01 23,090 28,488 46 
			 2001-02 24,880 30,025 44 
			 2002-03 26,460 30,934 40 
			 2003-04 28,430 32,326 36 
			 2004-05 28,870 31,939 34 
			 2005-06 29,150 31,658 31 
			 2006-07 29,310 30,917 28 
			 2007-08 29,660 30,408 27 
			 2008-09 29,320 29,320 24 
			 
			  England
			 1998-99 22,880 29,162 50 
			 1999-2000 23,630 29,537 48 
			 2000-01 23,880 29,462 47 
			 2001-02 23,380 28,215 44 
			 2002-03 23,790 27,813 41 
			 2003-04 24,640 28,017 37 
			 2004-05 25,650 28,376 33 
			 2005-06 25,530 27,726 31 
			 2006-07 24,970 26,339 27 
			 2007-08 25,340 25,979 24 
			 2008-09 25,410 25,410 24 
			  Source: Local authority returns to CLG on P1B

Tesco: Planning Permission

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough of 2 March 2010,  Official Report, column 1162W, on Tesco: planning permission, if he will place in the Library a copy of each of the rulings of the Planning Inspectorate relating to Tesco.

Ian Austin: Copies of each of the Planning Inspectorate's appeal decisions have today been placed in the Library of the House.
	It should be noted that in the instance of cases concerning linked appeals, joint decisions were issued.

CHILDREN, SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES

GCSE

William Cash: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many pupils in  (a) Staffordshire County Council area and  (b) England left school with (i) no GCSEs, (ii) at least one GCSE at grade A, (iii) at least one GCSE at grade B and (iv) at least one GCSE at grade C or D in each year since 1997.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 22 March 2010
	 The information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	The latest information on GCSE attainment has been published in SFR01/2010 GCSE and Equivalent Results in England, 2008/09 (Revised), which was released on 13 January 2010. This is available on the Department's website via the following link:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000909/index.shtml

Becta: Finance

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families with reference to his Department's press release of 9 March 2010, on school business managers, what the revised budget of Becta is, broken down by subheading.

Vernon Coaker: The announcement proposed savings based on Becta's 2010-11 allocated revenue budget of £65.151 million of which £2.25 million is received as an allocation from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
	The announced savings amount to £20 million in 2011-12 and £25 million in 2012-13. Details of the breakdown FY 2011-13 budgets have not yet been finalised.

Building Schools for the Future Programme

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what methodology is used in the Building Schools for the Future programme to  (a) determine whether value for money will be achieved in the selection of suppliers and  (b) evaluate whether value for money has been achieved in the work undertaken by suppliers.

Vernon Coaker: In accordance with the requirements of the European procurement regime, bidders are selected on the basis of the most economically advantageous tender. This means that the value for money of the bidders' proposals are tested in a confidential competitive environment and evaluated in terms of both price and quality against the local authority's requirements. There are a number of different approaches to project delivery available for Building Schools for the Future, the preferred approaches being to use a Local Education Partnership (LEP) or to use the Contractor Framework managed by Partnerships for Schools on behalf of the Department for Children, Schools and Families. When either approach is being used, the contractual arrangements between the parties require that value for money is demonstrated and that key performance indicators and continuous improvement commitments are met.
	Once a supplier is selected, the authority monitors the work undertaken (or arranges for the work to be monitored) to ensure compliance with the contractual requirements upon which the price is based.

Children in Care: Child Trust Fund

Ruth Kelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which local authorities  (a) ensure that the full £100 Child Trust Fund annual payments for looked-after children are put in their individual account and  (b) have used all or part of these payments for other purposes.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 17 March 2010
	Information about annual £100 Child Trust Fund top-up payments made by local authorities to the accounts of individual looked-after children who are eligible is not collected centrally. Statutory guidance
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/safeguarding andsocialcare/childrenincare/childtrustfund/childtrustfund/ (1)
	on arrangements for the payment of Child Trust Funds was issued to local authorities in England under section 7 of the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970 which they must act under when performing their duties under section 22(3)(a) (duty to promote the welfare of a looked after child) of the Children Act 1989. The devolved Administrations have also put guidance on the payment of Child Trust Funds in place.
	(1) Child Trust Fund Account Top Up Payments For Looked After Children: Statutory Guidance on Local Authority Practice in England.

Children: Human Trafficking

Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what his most recent estimate is of the number of child victims of trafficking in the UK.

Dawn Primarolo: The Department does not collect this information which is in any case intrinsically difficult given the hidden nature of the crime. However, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) estimated that around 325 children were believed to have been trafficked into the UK. This was taken from their 'Strategic Threat Assessment: Child Trafficking in the UK' published in April 2009. The estimate was derived from data covering the period 1 March 2007 to 29 February 2008.

Children: Language Difficulties

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what his policy is on the provision of early-stage learning facilities and support for children with language difficulties; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: Following the Bercow review of services for children and young people with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN), the Government published Better Communication: An action plan to improve services for children and young people with SLCN, backed by £12 million investment. As part of the action plan, we-together with the Department of Health are piloting good practice in commissioning SLCN services in 16 areas in order to develop a national framework to improve the way services are delivered for children across the country.
	In the Early Years, we have taken substantial steps to improve the quality of early learning and care including the introduction of the Early Years Foundation Stage which sets the standards for supporting children's early learning and care from birth to five. Alongside the EYFS, we are investing in the work force, including targeted programmes like Every Child a Talker (ECaT) designed to improve children's early language development through professional development for practitioners. ECaT was launched with a first wave of local authorities in 2008. It has promoted co-operation between local services, especially between Speech and Language services and early learning and care, to support children experiencing and at risk of language delay. From April 2010, all local authorities in England will have been funded to run the programme.

Children: Protection

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families staff in which posts of Ofsted are permitted to read full serious case reviews.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 11 March 2010
	This is a matter for Ofsted. HM Chief Inspector, Christine Gilbert, has written to the hon. Member and a copy of her reply has been placed in the House Libraries.
	 Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 10 March 2010:
	Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for response.
	The Ofsted personnel who read the full serious case reviews are senior social care inspectors, usually Her Majesty's Inspectors (HMI) of social care. For quality assurance purposes, some parts of the full serious case reviews will also be read by their senior managers, who are also qualified social care professionals. As Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, I also have access to full serious case reviews.
	A copy of this reply has been sent to Rt. Hon. Dawn Primarolo MP, Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families, and will be placed in the library of both Houses.

Children: Protection

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families staff in which posts in  (a) his Department and  (b) local education authorities are permitted to read full serious case reviews.

Dawn Primarolo: The Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) is sent an anonymised copy of each final Serious Case Review (SCR) by the LSCB concerned. These are forwarded by the relevant official in the DCSF Safeguarding Group to the researchers responsible for preparing biennial overview reports on Serious Case Reviews. Other post holders in the group may see a copy of a final SCR report if it is necessary for them to do so in the exercise of their responsibilities.
	The statutory guidance Working Together To Safeguard Children states that Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs) are responsible for undertaking SCRs and for determining who should have access to any part of the SCR. The membership of the LSCB must include representatives from the local authority.

Children's Centres

Peter Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what his most recent assessment is of the contribution of Sure Start children's centres to the objectives of his Department.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 22 March 2010
	Sure Start Children's Centres are becoming a universal service-on 16 March, the Prime Minster announced that the Government had met their target for 3,500 Sure Start Children's Centres in England. Children's Centres provide access to integrated services for young children and their families. They contribute to all Every Child Matters outcomes and a number of my Department's Strategic Objectives, in particular: to secure the wellbeing and health of children and young people; achieve world class standards in education; and close the gap in educational achievement for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.
	The National Evaluation of Sure Start, which has been under way since 2001, is comparing the development of children living in areas with children's centres originally established as Sure Start Local Programmes with children living in other areas. Its most recent report published in 2008 provides evidence of improved outcomes for children and families living in early Sure Start areas. Families living in early Sure Start areas used more child and family-related services than those living elsewhere. The reported benefits appeared to apply to all social groups, including those facing most disadvantages.
	The National Evaluation showed that children behave better and are more independent if they live in early Sure Start areas. Parents have more positive parenting skills and provide a better home learning environment for their children, helping prepare children to do well at school and make the most of their talents.
	The 2008 Foundation Stage Profile results show that 21,000 more five-year-olds are achieving a good level of development across a range of areas of learning and at the same time gaps have narrowed-lowest achieving children and children from disadvantaged areas are starting to catch up. These results suggest that our reforms and investment in the early years-including through Sure Start-are starting to have an impact on all children, and in narrowing gaps.
	The latest report from the National Evaluation of Sure Start indicated that young children living in the early Sure Start areas were more likely to have received the recommended immunisations and less likely to have had an accident resulting in injury.
	The Department's research on the use of children's centres, carried out by Taylor Nelson Sofres, entailed interviews with parents and carers of young children during 2008. The report in 2009 indicated that 78 per cent. of respondents knew about their local centre, and 92 per cent. who had used their local centre were satisfied with the service they received. The report also showed high levels of satisfaction with individual services provided through children's centres such as child care, nursery education, health, and family and parenting services.

Children's Centres: Greater Manchester

Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many children in  (a) the City of Manchester and  (b) Manchester, Central constituency attend Sure Start centres.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 1 March 2010
	 The 40 designated Sure Start Children's Centres in the city of Manchester local authority have a combined reach of over 35,000 children under five and their families. The 12 centres in Manchester, Central constituency have a combined reach of over 9,000 children under five and their families. Reach area defines those children and families with the opportunity to access children's centres. Figures for the number of children under five and their families actually attending and using children's centres are not collected centrally.

Children's Centres: Merseyside

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many Sure Start centres have been established on Merseyside; and what assessment he has made of their effectiveness.

Dawn Primarolo: There are a total of 83 designated Sure Start Children's Centres in Merseyside reaching over 66,800 children under five and their families. Reach area defines those children and families with the opportunity to access children's centres. Merseyside is assumed to refer to five local authorities: Liverpool, Wirral, Sefton, St. Helen's and Knowsley.
	The Department's guidance to children's centre leaders and local authorities sets an expectation that they should evaluate the effectiveness of children's centre services.
	The National Evaluation of Sure Start started in 2001 and last reported in 2008. Evidence from the last report showed improvements in outcomes for children and families living in areas served by children's centres, including children's behaviour and parents' support for their children's learning at home. The benefits appeared to apply to all social groups, including those facing most disadvantage. Awareness and satisfaction of children's centres is high. The TNS Research Report (2008) shows; 78 per cent. of all respondents knew about their local centre; 74 per cent. were familiar with the term 'Children's Centre'; and levels of satisfaction were very high with 92 per cent. of all users saying they were satisfied (68 per cent. were very satisfied). The Department has recently commissioned an evaluation of the implementation and impact of the full range of children's centres, with a first report expected in late 2010.

Departmental Advertising

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much he expects his Department to spend on  (a) television,  (b) radio,  (c) print and  (d) online advertising in (i) 2009-10 and (ii) 2010-11.

Diana Johnson: The forecasted figures for the requested advertising streams in 2009/10 are outlined in the following table. Planned expenditure in these areas for 2010/11 is not available at this time.
	
		
			  Advertising stream  Projected expenditure (£) 
			 Television 5,498,419 
			 Radio 2,670,910 
			 Print 1,576,590 
			 Online 2,208,908

Departmental Audit

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether his Department has updated its Allegations Audit, undertaken in 2003-04.

Dawn Primarolo: Similar data to those collected in the 2003-04 Allegations Audit were collected in 2004-05, and less detailed data on allegations were collected in 2007. The data collected in 2004-05 were used to inform the development of guidance on handling allegations of abuse made against those who work with children and young people, but were not published as a data set. The data collected in 2007 were used to inform the review of implementation of guidance on handling allegations. The analysis of those data were included within the report of the review published in May 2009 and are available to download from the Every Child Matters website.

Departmental Internet

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what funding his Department allocated for establishing and maintaining www.beGrand.net in the last 12 months.

Dawn Primarolo: The funding for the proposals outlined in Support for All: the Families and Relationships Green Paper has been allocated from current budgets. Funding of £1,058,000 has been allocated in 2009-10 to the BeGrand consortium to develop, build and maintain the service for grandparents.

Departmental Internet

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much has been spent on development of the begrand.net website; and how much has been budgeted for the development of the website in each of the next three years.

Dawn Primarolo: The BeGrand consortium was contracted in August 2009 to develop and build the BeGrand service for grandparents. Funding of £1,058,000 has been allocated in 2009-10 and £1,156,000 has been allocated in 2010-11. Funding has not been allocated beyond March 2011 as the current spending review expires at 31 March 2011.

Departmental Marketing

Robert Syms: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Ruislip-Northwood of 5 January 2010,  Official Report, column 103W, on departmental marketing, how much his Department and agencies have spent on advertising, marketing, public relations and publicity in relation to the  (a) Real Help Now and  (b) Building Britain's Future themed campaign to date.

Diana Johnson: The Department did not undertake any work on the two campaigns in 2008/09. Expenditure on the campaigns in 2009/10 is not currently available.

Departmental Official Cars

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the cost to his Department was of ministerial cars in each year since its inception; and if he will make a statement.

Diana Johnson: The Department for Children, Schools and Families was established in June 2007. Costs for providing official cars since inception are:
	
		
			   £ 
			 1 June 2007-31 March 2008 (1)- 
			 1 April 2008-31 March 2009 69,300 
			 1 April 2009-present 55,398 
			 (1 )Can be obtained only at disproportionate cost

GCSE

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families at how many  (a) secondary schools and  (b) maintained mainstream secondary schools at which more than 50 per cent. of pupils were eligible for free school meals fewer than 30 per cent. of pupils received five A*-C grades at GCSE including English and mathematics but excluding equivalents in (i) 1997 and (ii) the most recent year for which figures are available.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 21 January 2010
	In 2009, there were 26 maintained mainstream secondary schools where more than 50 per cent. of pupils are eligible for free school meals and fewer than 30 per cent of pupils received five A*-C grades at GCSE including English and Mathematics but excluding equivalents.
	In 2008, there were 33 maintained mainstream secondary schools where more than 50 per cent. of pupils are eligible for free school meals and fewer than 30 per cent. of pupils received five A*-C grades at GCSE including English and Mathematics but excluding equivalents.
	Figures relating to free school meal eligibility were not collected in 1997.
	Information regarding pupils eligible for free school meals is not collected from independent schools.

GCSE

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many pupils  (a) eligible and  (b) not eligible for free school meals were entered for GCSEs in English literature, physics, chemistry, biology, history and a foreign language in 2009.

Vernon Coaker: In 2009, 22,721 pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 were entered for GCSE examinations in the combination of English literature, physics, chemistry, biology, history and any modern foreign language.
	Of these, 631 pupils were known to be eligible for free school meals, 22,084 were not eligible for free school meals and there were six pupils for whom free school meal eligibility could not be determined.
	These figures relate to pupils in maintained schools only, including CTCs and academies. Information collected on free school meals forms part of the School Census which is carried out only in maintained schools. This free school meal information is then linked to attainment data. It relates to those pupils known to be eligible to receive free meals rather than those in receipt of free meals.

GCSE

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many pupils  (a) eligible and  (b) not eligible for free school meals were entered for (i) English literature, (ii) physics, (iii) chemistry, (iv) biology, (v) history and (vi) a foreign language GCSE in 2009.

Vernon Coaker: The requested information is shown in the following table and relates to pupils in 2009 in maintained schools only, including CTCs and academies.
	
		
			   Number of pupils: 
			   known to be eligible for free school meals  not eligible for free school meals 
			  Pupils who  entered for GCSEs in:   
			 English literature 44,942 399,628 
			 Physics 2,954 64,231 
			 Chemistry 2,985 64,334 
			 Biology 3,525 67,757 
			 History 13,466 160,415 
			 At least one modern foreign language 19,030 220,167 
		
	
	Information collected on free school meals forms part of the School Census which is only carried out in maintained schools. This free school meal information is then linked to attainment data. It relates to those pupils known to be eligible to receive free meals rather than those in receipt of free meals.

GCSE

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many pupils  (a) eligible for free school meals and  (b) in comprehensive schools gained five GCSEs at grades A* to C including English and mathematics and excluding equivalents in 2009.

Vernon Coaker: In 2009, 17,784 pupils eligible for free school meals gained five GCSEs at A*-C including English and mathematics and excluding equivalents.
	In 2009, 248,348 pupils in comprehensive schools gained five GCSEs at A*-C including English and mathematics and excluding equivalents.
	These figures were derived from the National Pupil Database (NPD).

GCSE

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of pupils  (a) eligible and  (b) not eligible for free school meals at the end of Key Stage 4 achieved five A* or A grades at GCSE including English and mathematics but excluding equivalents in (i) 2003 and (ii) 2009.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 1 March 2010
	The information requested is presented in the following table and is for maintained schools only.
	
		
			   Number of pupils( 1)  achieving 5 or more A* or A grades at GCSE including English and Maths (excluding equivalents)  Percentage achieving 5 or more A* or A grades at GCSE including English and Maths (excluding equivalents) 
			   Eligible for FSM  Not eligible for FSM  Eligible for FSM  Not eligible for FSM 
			 2003 791 33,538 1.0 6.8 
			 2009 1,257 45,535 1.7 9.0 
			 (1) Figures for 2003 are based on pupils aged 15 and 2009 figures are based on pupils at the end of key stage 4.  Source: National Pupil Database

GCSE: Disadvantaged

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families in how many and what proportion of schools in the  (a) highest and  (b) lowest index of multiple deprivation decile less than 30 per cent. of pupils obtained five A* to C grades at GCSE including English and mathematics but excluding equivalents in the most recent year for which figures are available.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer18 January 2010
	 The information requested for the academic year 2008/09 is provided in the following table:
	
		
			  The number and proportion of schools( 1)  in the highest and lowest Indices of Multiple Deprivation decile( 2)  in which less than 30 per cent. of pupils( 3 ) obtained five or more GCSEs at grades A*-C including English and maths GCSEs, but excluding equivalents( 4 ) in 2008/09 
			  IMD decile( 2)  Number of schools  Number of schools where fewer than 30 per cent. of eligible pupils achieved 5+ A*-C at GCSE including English and maths GCSEs, excluding equivalents in 2008/09  Percentage of schools where fewer than 30 per cent. of eligible pupils achieved 5+ A*-C at GCSE including English and maths GCSEs, excluding equivalents in 2008/09 
			 0-10%-most deprived 233 88 38 
			 90-100%-least deprived 292 4 1 
			 England total 2,988 398 13 
			 (1) Including only those open maintained mainstream schools with results published in the relevant years Achievement and Attainment tables and with more than ten pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 on roll. (2) 2007 Indices of Multiple Deprivation at Super Output Area level based on the location of the school. (3) Pupils at the end of Key Stage 4. (4) Qualifications included are full GCSEs, GCSE short courses, GCSE double awards, vocational single and double GCSEs and AS-levels.  Source: Achievement and Attainment Tables (2008/09 revised data)

GCSE: Truancy

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many pupils classified as persistent truants gained five GCSEs at A*-C including English and mathematics in the latest year for which figures are available.

Vernon Coaker: The latest data which match absence with attainment data are available for 2008 and relate to persistent absentees rather than 'truants'.
	In 2008, 7.2 per cent. of persistent absentees in state funded secondary schools attained five or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or the equivalent, including GCSEs in English and mathematics. In 2007 this figure was lower with 6.4 per cent. of persistent absentees attaining five or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or the equivalent, including GCSEs in English and mathematics in state funded secondary schools.
	The available information relates to persistent absentees, who are defined as pupils missing approximately 20 per cent. of possible sessions for the relevant statistical reporting period. On an annual basis this threshold is 64 or more sessions of absence, (authorised or unauthorised) during the year. (On a two term, autumn and spring basis, the threshold is typically 52 sessions). Unauthorised absence is defined as absence without leave from a teacher or other authorised representative of the school. This includes all unexplained or unjustified absences, such as lateness, holidays during term time not authorised by the school, absence where reason is not yet established and truancy.

Languages: Schools

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many schools were given the status of specialist language centre in each year since 2005; and if he will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: As part of the specialist schools programme, which covers only schools in England, there are 381 specialist language schools. Since 2005, 199 schools have been given specialist language college status; 17 in 2005, 77 in 2006, 14 in 2007, 46 in 2008 and 45 in 2009.

National Bullying Helpline

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether his Department and its predecessors have made any payments to  (a) the National Bullying Helpline and  (b) HR and Diversity Management Limited since 2004.

Diana Johnson: The Department's financial records show that no payments have been made to either the 'National Bullying Helpline' or 'HR and Diversity Management Ltd.' since 2004.

National Curriculum Tests

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families in how many schools in each local authority fewer than 50 per cent. of pupils attained Key Stage 2 at level 4 or above in both English and mathematics in the latest period for which figures are available.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 24 March 2010
	The latest information is available in the 2009 Achievement and Attainment Tables (AATs) and the Library.
	The 2009 AATs can be found at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables/primary_09.shtml

National Curriculum Tests: Sheffield

Clive Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  how many and what proportion of 11-year-olds achieved Level 4 at Key Stage 2 in  (a) English,  (b) mathematics and  (c) English and mathematics in each Sheffield constituency in each year since 1998;
	(2)  how many schools in each Sheffield constituency there were in which fewer than 30 per cent. of pupils achieved five or more GCSEs at grades A*-C including English and mathematics in each year since 1998;
	(3)  how many and what proportion of pupils achieved five or more GCSEs at grades A*-C in each Sheffield constituency in each year since 1998.

Vernon Coaker: The available information for PQ 323757 is in table one. Information on the number of pupils achieving level 4 or above at Key Stage 2 in English and mathematics combined is not available before the 2003/04 academic year.
	The available information for PQ 323758 and the requested information for PQ 323759 is in tables two and three. The academic year 2004/05 was the first year in which the Department published school level data on the percentage of schools achieving five or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and maths GCSEs.
	
		
			  Table 1: The number and proportion of pupils( 1)  in maintained schools( 2)  in each Sheffield constituency( 3)  achieving level 4 or above in Key Stage 2,  1998 to 2009 
			Number of pupils achieving level 4 in English  Proportion of pupils achieving level 4 in English  Number of pupils achieving level 4 in mathematics  Proportion of pupils achieving level 4 in mathematics  Number of pupils achieving level 4 in English and mathematics  Proportion of pupils achieving level 4 in English and mathematics 
			 1998 Sheffield, Attercliffe 592 55 559 51 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 457 42 435 40 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield Central 468 47 434 44 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 640 80 621 78 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 504 57 472 54 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 717 66 647 60 n/a n/a 
			 1999 Sheffield, Attercliffe 726 63 742 64 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 544 53 567 55 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield Central 544 53 557 55 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 672 84 683 86 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 623 61 660 64 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 783 72 786 72 n/a n/a 
			 2000 Sheffield, Attercliffe 743 69 696 65 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 604 57 585 55 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield Central 566 58 526 54 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 740 87 722 85 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 643 69 611 65 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 824 75 821 74 n/a n/a 
			 2001 Sheffield, Attercliffe 728 67 680 63 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 574 54 511 48 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield Central 566 57 590 60 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 685 85 666 83 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 615 65 578 61 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 871 78 833 75 n/a n/a 
			 2002 Sheffield, Attercliffe 834 71 852 73 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 584 55 596 56 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield Central 564 56 599 60 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 745 87 734 85 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 677 67 673 66 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 860 74 873 75 n/a n/a 
			 2003 Sheffield, Attercliffe 847 71 832 69 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 578 54 556 52 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield Central 563 60 565 61 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 702 85 697 85 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 670 69 657 68 n/a n/a 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 911 78 829 71 n/a n/a 
			 2004 Sheffield, Attercliffe 899 75 821 69 758 64 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 586 57 572 56 469 46 
			  Sheffield Central 611 63 592 61 510 52 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 748 88 711 84 682 80 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 620 67 600 65 529 57 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 903 80 870 77 794 71 
			 2005 Sheffield, Attercliffe 876 74 822 70 767 65 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 606 61 569 57 493 50 
			  Sheffield Central 618 64 597 62 510 53 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 728 88 684 83 659 80 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 639 69 614 66 545 59 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 886 82 826 77 779 72 
			 2006 Sheffield, Attercliffe 878 75 828 71 754 65 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 576 57 559 55 465 46 
			  Sheffield Central 602 65 579 62 507 54 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 706 88 689 86 654 81 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 606 70 615 71 544 62 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 809 79 784 77 721 70 
			 2007 Sheffield, Attercliffe 871 78 810 72 753 67 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 569 59 559 58 469 49 
			  Sheffield Central 530 62 505 59 435 51 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 713 90 682 86 656 83 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 624 73 600 70 542 63 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 851 81 820 78 750 72 
			 2008 Sheffield, Attercliffe 866 77 815 73 748 67 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 603 64 621 66 516 55 
			  Sheffield Central 632 68 619 67 529 57 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 749 91 721 88 701 85 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 644 74 612 70 549 63 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 921 85 891 82 843 78 
			 2009 Sheffield, Attercliffe 814 76 789 74 706 66 
			  Sheffield, Brightside 549 62 579 65 481 54 
			  Sheffield Central 634 70 651 72 557 61 
			  Sheffield, Hallam 737 88 710 85 690 82 
			  Sheffield, Heeley 636 73 661 76 591 68 
			  Sheffield, Hillsborough 901 84 871 82 821 77 
			 n/a = Not available. (1) Pupils eligible for English, mathematics or science. (2) All maintained schools (including City Technology Colleges and Academies). (3) Parliamentary Constituency figures do not include pupils recently arrived from overseas.  Source:  National Pupil Database and Achievement and Attainment Tables (final data) 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: The number of maintained mainstream schools( 1)  in each Sheffield constituency in which less than 30 per cent of pupils( 2)  obtained five or more GCSEs or equivalent at grades A*-C including English and maths GCSEs, 2004/05 to 2008/09 
			   2004/05  2005/06  2006/07  2007/08  2008/09 
			 Sheffield, Attercliffe 2 1 1 1 0 
			 Sheffield, Brightside 5 5 5 5 3 
			 Sheffield Central 1 0 1 1 1 
			 Sheffield, Hallam 0 1 1 1 1 
			 Sheffield, Heeley 2 1 1 1 1 
			 Sheffield, Hillsborough 1 0 1 0 0 
			 (1 )Including only those open maintained mainstream schools with results published in the relevant years Achievement and attainment tables and with more than ten pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 on roll. (2) Pupils at the end of Key Stage 4.  Source:  Achievement and Attainment Tables (2004/05 - 2007/08 final data, 2008/09 revised data) 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 3: The number and proportion of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 in maintained schools( 1)  in each Sheffield constituency( 2 ) achieving five or more GCSEs or equivalent( 3)  at grades A*-C, 1997/98 - 2008/09( 4) 
			Sheffield, Attercliffe  Sheffield, Brightside  Sheffield Central  Sheffield, Hallam  Sheffield, Heeley  Sheffield, Hillsborough 
			 1997/98 Number of pupils 264 127 32 784 335 340 
			  Proportion of pupils 34.3 16.2 11.2 59.1 38.2 37.8 
			 1998/99 Number of pupils 284 110 25 746 350 349 
			  Proportion of pupils 36.0 13.9 8.9 56.3 38.4 40.5 
			 1999/2000 Number of pupils 281 165 42 848 367 408 
			  Proportion of pupils 34.9 19.5 15.7 59.8 41.6 44.4 
			 2000/01 Number of pupils 321 179 52 830 384 433 
			  Proportion of pupils 38.8 21.1 18.7 59.7 40.5 46.1 
			 2001/02 Number of pupils 310 211 71 854 387 463 
			  Proportion of pupils 35.7 23.5 22.3 59.5 40.1 44.1 
			 2002/03 Number of pupils 345 249 82 912 378 466 
			  Proportion of pupils 38.0 26.8 24.2 64.6 38.9 44.0 
			 2003/04 Number of pupils 406 268 97 909 428 496 
			  Proportion of pupils 40.5 28.8 28.0 63.5 41.6 46.5 
			 2004/05 Number of pupils 395 290 109 974 380 532 
			  Proportion of pupils 40.3 31.5 31.7 68.3 39.0 49.2 
			 2005/06 Number of pupils 415 311 114 961 429 560 
			  Proportion of pupils 43.5 32.1 32.9 67.5 42.7 52.9 
			 2006/07 Number of pupils 481 385 151 989 499 588 
			  Proportion of pupils 49.0 38.9 41.4 67.2 48.3 55.6 
			 2007/08 Number of pupils 566 443 165 989 531 677 
			  Proportion of pupils 56.5 44.8 46.7 68.7 53.5 61.9 
			 2008/09 Number of pupils 677 531 198 1043 615 678 
			  Proportion of pupils 68.1 56.2 55.2 72.9 62.7 65.8 
			 (1) All maintained schools (including City Technology Colleges and Academies). (2) Parliamentary constituency figures do not include pupils recently arrived from overseas. (3) From 1997/98 includes GNVQ equivalences and from 2003/04 other equivalences approved for use pre-16. (4) Figures for 2004/05 onwards are based on pupils at the end of Key Stage 4. Data for previous years are based on pupils aged 15 years old at the start of the academic year. S ource:  National Pupil Database and Achievement and Attainment Tables (1997/98 - 2007/08 final data, 2008/09 revised data)

Pre-school Education

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many two- year-olds he expects to have participated in free early years pre-school entitlement by 2016.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 24 February 2010
	 By the end of March 2010 it is expected some 20,000 two-year-olds from the most disadvantaged backgrounds will have access to a free early learning and child care place each year.
	We will continue to make progress on the long-term ambition that the Prime Minister has set out to provide free part-time nursery places for all two-year-olds whose parents want them.
	Decisions regarding the pace of future roll-out will need to be taken in the light of wider fiscal considerations as part of the next spending review.

Pre-school Education: Northampton

Sally Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many nursery places there were for children in Northampton in  (a) 1997,  (b) 2001,  (c) 2005 and  (d) 2010.

Dawn Primarolo: Table 1 shows the number of part-time equivalent places filled by three and four-year-olds in Northamptonshire local authority in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2009. Data for 2010 are not yet available and will be published in the summer, so 2009 has been provided instead.
	Data on the number of places available are not collected; only data on the number of places filled are available as children can access their free entitlement across different local authorities.
	Part-time equivalent places are derived by counting children taking up 12 and a half hours per week as one place, 10 hours per week as 0.8 places, seven and a half hours per week as 0.6 places, five hours per week as 0.4 places and two and a half hours per week as 0.2 places.
	
		
			  Table 1: Part-time equivalent number of free early education places( 1,)( )( 2,)( )( 3)  filled by three and four-year-olds( 4) , local authority: Northamptonshire, position in January each year 
			   Number of places 
			 1997 9,700 
			 2001 11,000 
			 2005 14,000 
			 2009 15,100 
			 (1) A place is equal to 12.5 hours (five sessions) and can be filled by more than one child.  (2) Figures are rounded to the nearest 100.  (3) Prior to 2004, information on early education places was derived from returns made by local authorities as part of the nursery education grant (NEG) data collection exercise. From 2004 onwards, information has been derived from Early Years Census and School Census data.  (4) Age of all children taken at 31 December in the previous calendar year.   Source:  Early Years Census and School Census. 
		
	
	The Department publishes information on the part-time equivalent number of free early education places filled by three and four-year-olds in maintained, private, voluntary and independent providers available at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000848/index.shtml

Primary Education

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 11 January 2010,  Official Report, columns 726-27W, on primary education, how the information included in the answer was compiled.

Vernon Coaker: Information included in the answer of 11 January 2010,  Official Report, columns 726-27W, was derived from new analysis of pupil attendance data submitted as part of the School Census. Attendance records are returned for each period of time spent in a relevant school in a school year.
	Previous questions on this subject have not been answered substantively because an appropriate methodology had not been developed and to do so would have incurred disproportionate cost. However, a methodology based on pupil attendance data has since been developed that can be used to answer this type of question.

Pupil Exclusions: Milton Keynes

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many children have been permanently excluded from  (a) primary,  (b) middle,  (c) upper and  (d) secondary schools in Milton Keynes in each year since 1997.

Diana Johnson: The available information requested is shown in the table.
	From 2002, the Department has carried out a checking exercise to confirm the overall number of permanent exclusions. However, this only confirms the number of exclusions in each local authority area and not at school level. Therefore information for middle and upper schools is not separately identifiable.
	The latest data on exclusions were published in a Statistical First Release on 30 July 2009 at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000860/index.shtml
	
		
			  Maintained primary and secondary schools( 1) : Number of pupil enrolments( 2)  with permanent exclusions, 1996/97 to 2007/08, Milton Keynes local authority 
			   Primary( 1)  State-funded secondary( 1, 3) 
			   Number of permanent exclusions  Percentage of the school population( 4)  Number of permanent exclusions  Percentage of the school population( 4) 
			 1996/97 10 0.05 20 0.21 
			 1997/98 - - 40 0.34 
			 1998/99 10 0.05 10 0.12 
			 1999/2000 20 0.09 20 0.13 
			 2000/01 10 0.04 10 0.08 
			 2001/02 20 0.09 30 0.20 
			 2002/03(5) 20 0.08 30 0.21 
			 2003/04(5) 20 0.07 20 0.16 
			 2004/05(5) 10 0.06 40 0.27 
			 2005/06(5) * * 50 0.30 
			 2006/07(5) 10 0.05 40 0.28 
			 2007/08(5) 10 0.03 30 0.20 
			 Data are as published, i.e. using the following notation: * = less than 3, or a rate based on less than 3. - = less than 5, or a rate based on less than 5.  (1) Includes middle schools as deemed (upper schools are included as secondary).  (2) Pupils may be counted more than once if they were registered at more than one school or moved schools during the school year.  (3) State-funded secondary schools include maintained secondary schools, city technology colleges and academies. Milton Keynes local authority has no city technology colleges or academies.  (4) The number of permanent exclusions expressed as a percentage of the number (headcount) of all pupils (excluding dually registered pupils) in January each year of the relevant school type.  (5) Estimates based on local authority figures following a checking exercise to confirm the overall number of permanent exclusions in each local authority.   Note:  Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10.   Source:  Termly Exclusions Survey and School Census.

Schools: Admissions

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  how many surplus places there are in  (a) primary and  (b) secondary schools in each local authority;
	(2)  which local authorities which have over  (a) 10 per cent. and  (b) 25 per cent. surplus school places;
	(3)  which schools have surplus places; and how many surplus places each has.

Vernon Coaker: The Department collects information from each local authority on the number of surplus places through an annual survey. The most recent published data relate to the position at January 2009 and show the breakdown of surplus places by local authority in primary and secondary schools. The data are available at:
	http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/management/tsp/primarytoolkit/context/data
	As requested, a copy of the data has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	A table showing the number of local authorities with a percentage of surplus places of 10 or above at primary level and those with a percentage of surplus of 10 or above at secondary level has also been placed in the Libraries. There are no local authorities with 25 per cent. or more surplus school places.

Schools: Consultants

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what guidance his Department provides to  (a) schools and  (b) local authorities on their use of independent consultants and investigators.

Vernon Coaker: The Department does not provide guidance on the use of independent consultants and investigators by either schools or local authorities in connection with school staff suspensions and disciplinary matters. The operation of disciplinary procedures, including those that may result in suspension, is a matter for local determination as are decisions on whether additional or external sources of advice and support should be engaged.

Schools: ICT

Fraser Kemp: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much funding his Department and its predecessors have provided for  (a) computers and  (b) information and communications technologies in schools and colleges in the City of Sunderland in the last five years for which figures are available.

Vernon Coaker: Funding for computers and information and communications technology in schools is made available predominantly via the Harnessing Technology Grant. This is paid by the Department to local authorities through the Standards Fund. The available figures on the amount of the Harnessing Technology Grant paid to the Sunderland local authority for each of the three years in the current spending period is set out in the following table:
	
		
			  Harnessing technology grant allocation to Sunderland 
			   £ 
			 2008/09 853,603 
			 2009/10 952,606 
			 2010/11 1,042,241 
			 Total 2008/2011 2,848,450 
		
	
	However, the harnessing technology grant will not be the total ICT spend, as schools are free to use money from other sources on technological services and infrastructure. It should also be noted that the harnessing technology grant does not include funding that is being provided to the Government's educational technology agency, Becta, in particular for the Home Access scheme (£300 million across England) which provides computers and an internet connection for eligible low income households.

Schools: Internet

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what  (a) funding and  (b) other support his Department has provided to the South West Grid for Learning in 2009-10; and whether he has had recent discussions with representatives of the grid on funding of broadband access for small primary schools.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 22 March 2010
	The South-West Grid for Learning (SWGFL) has not received any funding or support from DCSF or Becta in 2009-10, other than (i) small-scale grants to help promote adoption of the Becta self-review framework by schools; and (ii) support in kind to become a Framework for ICT Technical Support (FITS) training partner. Becta personnel recently met the chief executive for SWGFL to continue discussions about an effective strategic partnership in the SW-the costs of their broadband provision to schools, and the possibility of giving schools greater choice over the range of SWGFL-provided services that they pay for were also raised.

Schools: Managers

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what minimum qualifications will be required of school business managers; what the salary of a school business manager will be; and with what training school business managers will be provided.

Vernon Coaker: It is for schools to determine the appropriate level of qualification and salary for a School Business Manager. However, the National College for the Leadership of Schools and Children's Services has developed a career pathway comprising three programmes: the Certificate, the Diploma and the Advanced Diploma of School Business Management, which maps across the recently published National Association of School Business Management (NASBM) Competency Framework. There are currently 7,362(1) qualified School Business Managers, with a further 3,011(1) undergoing training.
	 Source:
	(1) National College for the Leadership of Schools and Children's Services programme statistics.

Science: GCSE

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many pupils eligible for free school meals were entered for GCSEs in  (a) biology and chemistry but not physics,  (b) biology and physics but not chemistry,  (c) physics and chemistry but not biology and  (d) physics, chemistry and biology in (i) 1997 and (ii) the most recent year for which figures are available.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 22 February 2010
	Of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 in 2009, in maintained schools, eligible for free school meals:
	41 were entered for biology and chemistry but not physics GCSEs,
	11 were entered for biology and physics but not chemistry GCSEs,
	8 were entered for physics and chemistry but not biology GCSEs, and
	2,911 were entered for physics, chemistry and biology GCSEs.
	Comparable figures for 1997 can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 in 2005, in maintained schools, eligible for free school meals:
	60 were entered for biology and chemistry but not physics GCSEs,
	12 were entered for biology and physics but not chemistry GCSEs,
	6 were entered for physics and chemistry but not biology GCSEs, and
	1,296 were entered for physics, chemistry and biology GCSEs.

Sixth Form Education: Admissions

Kelvin Hopkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many surplus places there were in school sixth forms in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: The Department collects information from each local authority on the number of primary and secondary surplus school places via an annual survey.
	The number of surplus places is not broken down into year groups. Local authorities provide the number of places (net capacity) for each secondary school as a whole; school sixth forms are not reported on separately because much of the space in secondary schools is shared between sixth form and other pupils.
	The following table shows the number of surplus places in maintained secondary schools between 2005 and 2009 which are the most recent data available.
	
		
			   Secondary surplus places( 1)  Surplus as a percentage of total secondary places 
			 2009 309,712 9 
			 2008 298,859 9 
			 2007 271,175 8 
			 2006 244,111 7 
			 2005 227,168 7 
			 (1) Number of places relate to position as at January  Source: Surplus Places Survey

Sixth Form Education: Admissions

Kelvin Hopkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families with reference to table 3 on page 17 of his Department's 16-19 Statement of priorities and investment strategy 2010-11, what specific data the Young People's Learning Agency used to predict an increase in 10,000 enrolments in academy sixth forms in 2010-11.

Vernon Coaker: The planned delivery of academy and city technology college sixth form places in academic year 2010/11 shown in the DCSF/LSC Statement of Priorities document is 37,000 compared with 25,000 in 2009/10. This increase was estimated in the autumn of 2009 using the 2009/10 funded numbers at existing academies and CTCs; the historical rate of increase in academy provision as their sixth forms grow (reflecting their role in increasing participation) to estimate the growth into 2010/11; and the average size of sixth form in maintained schools converting into academies. The major part of the increase between years is actually due to the expected conversion of up to 80 maintained schools into academies in 2010/11. The actual increase in funded places will depend on the allocations process for individual academies, which is still under way.

Special Educational Needs

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families at which mainstream  (a) primary and  (b) secondary schools more than 50 per cent. of the pupils have statemented or non-statemented special educational needs.

Diana Johnson: holding answer 5 February 2010
	The list of maintained primary and state funded secondary schools at which more than 50 per cent. of the pupils have statemented or non-statemented special educational needs is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  Maintained primary and state funded secondary( 1)  schools at which more than 50 per cent. of pupils have statemented or non-statemented special educational needs. Year: January 2009. Coverage: England 
			 Pupils with special educational needs with or without statements( 2) 
			  Local authority name  School name  Headcount of pupils( 3)  Number  Percentage 
			  Maintained primary schools 
			 Hampshire Front Lawn Infant School 130 100 75.6 
			 North East Lincolnshire Grange Junior School 160 120 73.1 
			 Brighton and Hove Moulsecoomb Primary School 380 280 72.1 
			 Hampshire Trosnant Junior School and BESD Unit 210 150 70.8 
			 Brighton and Hove St. Mark's C of E Primary School 190 130 69.3 
			 South Tyneside Laygate School 300 210 68.9 
			 North Somerset St. Barnabas Church of England Primary School 40 30 67.6 
			 Kirklees Ashbrow Junior School 150 100 67.5 
			 Nottinghamshire Eastwood Junior School 90 60 65.1 
			 Worcestershire The Fairfield Community Primary School 190 120 64.9 
			 Kent Oak Trees Community School 160 100 64.7 
			 Brighton and Hove Whitehawk Primary School 310 200 63.8 
			 Kent Bysing Wood Primary School 80 50 63.8 
			 Norfolk Howard Infant and Nursery School, King's Lynn 150 90 63.3 
			 Wolverhampton Eastfield Junior and Infant School 170 110 62.7 
			 City of Nottingham Highwood Player Junior School 200 130 62.7 
			 Dudley Woodside Community School and Children's 280 170 62.6 
			 Bradford Horton Park Primary School 210 130 62.6 
			 Essex Crays Hill Primary School 100 60 62.1 
			 Cheshire Lache Primary School 230 140 61.9 
			 Hampshire South View Junior School 220 140 61.9 
			 Waltham Forest Whittingham Community Primary School 470 290 61.0 
			 Norfolk St. Edmund's Community Foundation School 180 110 60.6 
			 North Yorkshire Scarborough, Braeburn Community Junior School 180 110 60.3 
			 Kent Dame Janet Community Junior School 340 210 60.3 
			 Kent Parkside Community Primary School 150 90 59.7 
			 Wakefield Pontefract Willow Park Junior School 100 60 59.6 
			 Lincolnshire Sutton Bridge Westmere Community Primary 190 110 59.5 
			 Kent Murston Junior School 130 80 59.4 
			 Lincolnshire Theddlethorpe Primary School 80 50 59.2 
			 Manchester Gorton Mount Primary School 450 270 59.2 
			 Rotherham Maltby Crags Infant School 190 110 58.5 
			 Hampshire Meadowlands Infant School 80 50 58.4 
			 Northamptonshire Park Junior School, Wellingborough 230 140 58.4 
			 Greenwich Middle Park Primary School 330 190 58.3 
			 Devon Haytor View Community Primary School 190 110 57.7 
			 Northamptonshire Earl Spencer Primary School 190 110 57.5 
			 Leeds Middleton Primary School 340 200 57.5 
			 Durham St. Joseph's Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided 130 80 57.5 
			 Portsmouth Arundel Court Junior School 230 130 57.3 
			 Cheshire Greenfields Primary School 180 100 57.2 
			 Islington New North Community School 410 230 57.1 
			 Buckinghamshire Tilehouse Combined School 140 80 57.0 
			 Warwickshire Hurley Primary School 140 80 56.9 
			 Hillingdon Brookside Primary School 430 250 56.8 
			 Hampshire Riders Junior School 230 130 56.8 
			 Durham St. John's Church of England Aided Primary School 240 140 56.8 
			 Kent Sherwood Park Community Primary School 350 200 56.7 
			 Medway All Faiths' Children's Community School 140 80 56.6 
			 Wigan Newton Westpark Primary School 140 80 56.4 
			 Cumbria Ewanrigg Junior School 150 80 56.4 
			 Southend Hamstel Junior School 470 260 56.2 
			 Rotherham Maltby Crags Junior School 190 110 56.1 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne Atkinson Road Primary School 330 180 55.8 
			 Manchester St. Wilfrid's C of E Junior and Infant School 220 130 55.8 
			 North East Lincolnshire Grange Infant and Nursery School 200 110 55.4 
			 Blackburn with Darwen Intack Primary School 220 120 55.3 
			 Devon Clovelly Primary School 20 10 55.0 
			 Leicestershire Dove Bank Primary School 90 50 54.9 
			 Northamptonshire Falconer's Hill Infant School 160 90 54.9 
			 Hillingdon Longmead Primary School 190 110 54.9 
			 Kent St. Ethelbert's Catholic Primary School 220 120 54.8 
			 Redcar and Cleveland Dormanstown Primary School 250 140 54.7 
			 Hampshire Riders Infant School 150 80 54.7 
			 Kent St Philip Howard Catholic Primary School 140 80 54.6 
			 City of Nottingham Huntingdon Primary and Nursery School 240 130 54.5 
			 Derbyshire Langwith Bassett Primary School 70 40 54.4 
			 Kent St. John's Church of England Primary School, 60 30 54.0 
			 Durham St. Pius X Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Pr 80 40 53.9 
			 Wandsworth Shaftesbury Park Primary School 280 150 53.8 
			 Stockport Bridge Hall Primary School 130 70 53.8 
			 South Tyneside Hedworthfield Primary School 230 120 53.7 
			 Bradford Parkland Primary School 190 100 53.7 
			 Reading George Palmer Primary School 400 220 53.6 
			 Wiltshire The Manor C of E VC Primary School 210 110 53.5 
			 Buckinghamshire Hannah Ball Infant School 60 30 53.4 
			 North Tyneside Shiremoor Primary School 390 210 53.4 
			 Bradford Parkwood Primary School 210 110 53.4 
			 Brighton and Hove Coombe Road Primary School 290 150 53.3 
			 City of Nottingham Brocklewood Junior School 180 100 53.3 
			 Bolton Top o'th'Brow Primary School 200 110 53.3 
			 Rotherham High Greave Infant School 180 100 53.3 
			 Havering Brookside Junior School 240 130 53.2 
			 Medway Luton Junior School 320 170 53.1 
			 Darlington Skerne Park Primary School 370 200 53.1 
			 Kent Newington Community Primary School 360 190 53.1 
			 Norfolk St. Andrew's Church of England Primary School 70 40 53.0 
			 City of Peterborough Abbotsmede Primary School 270 140 53.0 
			 Somerset Halcon Community Primary School 140 70 52.9 
			 Somerset Hamp Community Junior School 210 110 52.8 
			 Durham Woodhouse Community Primary School 200 110 52.8 
			 Hounslow Crane Park Primary School 350 180 52.5 
			 Devon Sticklepath Community School 300 160 52.3 
			 Hampshire Siskin Junior School 150 80 52.3 
			 Camden Richard Cobden Primary School 450 230 52.2 
			 Kent Kings Farm Primary School 250 130 52.2 
			 Reading Whitley Park Junior School 270 140 52.2 
			 Knowsley St. Dominic's Catholic Junior School 190 100 52.2 
			 Hampshire Chineham Park Primary School 100 50 52.0 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne Canning Street Primary School 450 230 51.9 
			 Wirral Fender Primary School 190 100 51.9 
			 Lancashire Cherry Fold Community Primary School 270 140 51.9 
			 Hampshire Trosnant Infant School 140 70 51.8 
			 West Sussex Bewbush Community Primary 410 210 51.7 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham Wormholt Park Primary School 440 230 51.7 
			 Hertfordshire Sandon Junior Mixed and Infant School 90 50 51.6 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne Thomas Walling Primary School 340 170 51.5 
			 Hampshire Meadowlands Junior School 100 50 51.5 
			 Kent Newlands Primary School 410 210 51.3 
			 West Sussex Clapham and Patching C of E Primary School 40 20 51.3 
			 Warwickshire All Saints C of E Infant School 120 60 51.3 
			 Hampshire Front Lawn Junior School 200 100 51.2 
			 Bexley Slade Green Infant School 240 130 51.2 
			 Norfolk Larkman Primary School 290 150 51.2 
			 Kent St. Mary of Charity C of E (Aided) Primary School 220 110 51.1 
			 Doncaster Mexborough Doncaster Road Junior School 90 50 51.1 
			 Rotherham Badsley Moor Infant School 240 120 51.1 
			 Hampshire South View Infant School 200 100 51.0 
			 Cumbria Newtown Community Primary School 110 50 50.9 
			 Hampshire Siskin Infant and Nursery School 170 90 50.9 
			 Devon Wynstream School 270 140 50.7 
			 Southampton Mason Moor Primary School 260 130 50.6 
			 Leeds Kippax Greenfield Primary School 170 90 50.6 
			 Durham Tow Law Millennium Primary School 90 50 50.6 
			 Portsmouth Paulsgrove Primary School 360 180 50.6 
			 Cumbria Monkwray Junior School 110 60 50.5 
			 Kent Northdown Primary School 330 170 50.5 
			 Islington Grafton Primary School 460 230 50.4 
			 Leeds Ebor Gardens Primary School 250 120 50.4 
			 Thurrock Tilbury Manor Junior School 260 130 50.2 
			  
			  State funded secondary schools 
			 Hampshire Staunton Community Sports College 520 390 75.6 
			 Wandsworth Southfields Community College 1,380 1,020 74.3 
			 City of Nottingham Hadden Park High School 650 450 68.2 
			 Salford Harrop Fold School 700 470 67.2 
			 Leeds Cockburn College of Arts 1,050 710 67.2 
			 Birmingham St. Albans C of E Specialist Engineering College 430 290 67.1 
			 Sefton Litherland High School 750 490 65.0 
			 Liverpool West Derby School 1,080 700 65.0 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne All Saints College 850 550 64.8 
			 Kirklees Batley Girls' High School 1,090 700 64.6 
			 Newham Brampton Manor School 1,430 910 63.5 
			 Kent Cheyne Middle School 460 290 62.6 
			 City of Nottingham Fairham Community College 170 100 61.4 
			 Medway Temple School 370 220 59.8 
			 Islington Highbury Grove School 1,020 600 59.1 
			 Kirklees Fartown High School 400 240 58.9 
			 Lambeth Stockwell Park School 980 570 58.5 
			 Wandsworth Chestnut Grove School 870 500 57.8 
			 Torbay Torquay Community College 800 460 57.3 
			 Bradford Nab Wood School 910 520 57.0 
			 Greenwich Eltham Green Specialist Sports College 1,050 600 56.6 
			 Derby Bemrose School 820 460 56.5 
			 Lancashire Hornby High School 130 70 56.2 
			 Kent Hartsdown Technology College 1,080 600 56.1 
			 Wakefield Featherstone Technology College 620 340 55.9 
			 Southampton Redbridge Community School 920 520 55.9 
			 Kent The Mailing School 430 240 55.6 
			 Kent Northfleet Technology College 910 500 55.6 
			 Manchester Manchester Academy 870 480 55.4 
			 Waltham Forest George Mitchell School 590 330 55.2 
			 Kent Sittingbourne Community College 1,260 690 55.0 
			 Calderdale The Ridings School 170 90 54.7 
			 Slough Beechwood School 770 420 54.6 
			 Sheffield Chaucer Business and Enterprise College 880 480 54.6 
			 Northumberland Hirst High School 540 300 54.2 
			 Brighton and Hove Falmer High School 660 350 53.9 
			 Hampshire Park Community School 880 470 53.9 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham Phoenix High School 840 450 53.7 
			 City of Nottingham Haywood School 70 40 53.6 
			 Westminster Westminster Academy 840 450 53.5 
			 Gloucestershire Bishops' College 510 270 53.4 
			 Southampton Chamberlayne College for the Arts 680 360 53.2 
			 Poole Rossmore Community College 550 290 53.1 
			 Norfolk Charles Burrell Humanities School 660 350 53.0 
			 Southampton Oasis Academy Lord's Hill 870 460 53.0 
			 Norfolk The Open Academy 460 250 53.0 
			 Medway New Brompton College 990 520 52.9 
			 Liverpool North Liverpool Academy 1,150 610 52.8 
			 Nottinghamshire The Queen Elizabeth's (1561) Endowed School 1,080 570 52.8 
			 Wokingham Ryeish Green School 300 160 52.8 
			 Manchester North Manchester High School for Boys 700 370 52.6 
			 North East Lincolnshire Oasis Academy Wintringham 750 390 52.6 
			 Birmingham Yardleys School 900 470 52.6 
			 Kent The North School 950 500 52.6 
			 West Sussex Ifield Community College 1,020 530 52.5 
			 Westminster St. George RC School 600 310 51.9 
			 Redcar and Cleveland Saint Peter's Catholic College of Maths and Computing 420 220 51.9 
			 Kent The Wildemesse School 510 260 51.9 
			 Southwark Harris Academy Bermondsey 880 460 51.9 
			 Kent New Line Learning Academy 770 400 51.8 
			 West Sussex Thomas Bennett Community College 1,320 680 51.8 
			 Wakefield Cathedral C of E (VC) High School 880 450 51.6 
			 Kent Tunbridge Wells High School 340 170 51.0 
			 Sheffield Parkwood High School 680 350 50.9 
			 Lambeth Norwood School 700 360 50.9 
			 Northamptonshire Weavers School 790 400 50.8 
			 Norfolk The Hewett School 1,010 510 50.8 
			 Trafford Stretford High School 710 360 50.8 
			 Haringey Gladesmore Community School 1,240 630 50.7 
			 Westminster Paddington Academy 1,130 570 50.6 
			 Newham Kingsford Community School 1,450 730 50.4 
			 (1) Includes maintained secondary schools, city technology colleges and academies (including all-through academies). (2) Pupils with SEN without statements include school action and school action plus. (3) Excludes dually registered pupils.  Note: Pupil numbers rounded to the nearest 10.  Source: School Census

Specialist Schools and Academies Trust: Contracts

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what contracts have been awarded by his Department to the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust; what the value is of each contract; and if he will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: The Specialist Schools and Academies Trust has successfully bid for a number of contracts advertised by the Department in open competition. Details of live contracts between DCSF and SSAT are as follows.
	
		
			  Programme  Contract period  Total value of contract (£) 
			 Academies school improvement support September 2008 to  August 2011 13,600,000 
			 Curriculum Policy Delivery June 2007 to March 2010 7,451,000 
			 Gaining Ground April 2009 to  February 2011 3,572,000 
			 Licence to Cook/Teach Food Technology April 2009 to March 2011 1,200,000 
			 Teachers International Professional Development June 2008 to March 2011 3,306,844 
			 Trusts Delivery(1) September 2007 to  August 2010 8,222,991 
			 Work Related Learning Enterprise Policy October 2008 to  March 2010 7,681,514 
			 (1) SSAT bid for this contract as part of a consortium also including the Youth Sport Trust and Foundation and Aided Schools National Foundation

Support for All: The Families and Relationships

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much his Department allocated to deliver and maintain the online eligibility checker for parents as referred to in the Green Paper, Support for All: the Families and Relationships in the last 12 months.

Dawn Primarolo: The funding for the proposals outlined in Support for All: the Families and Relationships Green Paper has been allocated from current budgets.
	The online eligibility checker will be taken forward next financial year and consequently no money has been spent on it to date. It is anticipated that the project will cost in the region of £100,000 and that the funding required will be allocated from the 2010-11 Affordable Childcare Campaign budget.

Sure Start Programme

Ken Purchase: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many Sure Start children's centres there are in the City of Wolverhampton.

Dawn Primarolo: There are 18 designated Sure Start Children's Centres in the Wolverhampton city council local authority area.

Sure Start Programme: York

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many  (a) children and  (b) families are in receipt of support from Sure Start Children's Centres in York.

Dawn Primarolo: The 10 designated Sure Start Children's Centres in the City of York local authority area have a combined reach of over 8,400 children under five and their families. Reach area defines those children and families with the opportunity to access children's centres. Figures for the number of children under five and their families actually attending and using children's centres are not collected centrally.

Teachers: Males

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  pursuant to the answer of 14 December 2009,  Official Report, column 707W, on teachers: males, if he will provide the figures for each local authority;
	(2)  pursuant to the answer of 14 December 2009,  Official Report, column 708W, on teachers: males; how many  (a) nursery and primary and  (b) secondary schools with no male teachers there were in each local authority area.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 24 February 2010
	The School Census reports that only two local authority maintained secondary schools (one in Bradford local authority and one in Hackney local authority) did not have a male teacher in service in January 2009. Both of these are girls schools with a religious character. The following table provides similar numbers for local authority maintained nursery and primary schools:
	
		
			  Local authority maintained nursery and primary schools in each local authority who do not have a male teacher in service, year: January 2009, coverage: England 
			  Number 
			   Schools with no male teacher in service 
			   Nursery  Primary  Nursery and primary 
			  England 386 3,840 4,226 
			 
			 Gateshead 1 13 14 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 6 10 16 
			 North Tyneside 1 9 10 
			 South Tyneside 4 8 12 
			 Sunderland 9 16 25 
			 Hartlepool 1 3 4 
			 Middlesbrough 0 8 8 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 0 8 8 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 0 8 8 
			 Former Durham n/a n/a n/a 
			 Darlington 2 2 4 
			 Durham (post 1 April 1997) 10 65 75 
			 Northumberland 1 71 72 
			  North East 35 221 256 
			 
			 Cumbria 5 99 104 
			 Former Cheshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Cheshire (post 1 April 1998) 1 55 56 
			 Halton 4 11 15 
			 Warrington 1 9 10 
			 Bolton 4 14 18 
			 Bury 1 2 3 
			 Manchester 2 13 15 
			 Oldham 0 18 18 
			 Rochdale 4 9 13 
			 Salford 0 13 13 
			 Stockport 9 18 27 
			 Tameside 0 12 12 
			 Trafford 0 10 10 
			 Wigan 2 16 18 
			 Former Lancashire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Lancashire (post 1 April 1998) 23 103 126 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 9 6 15 
			 Blackpool 0 1 1 
			 Knowsley 0 6 6 
			 Liverpool 4 22 26 
			 St. Helens 1 6 7 
			 Sefton 4 9 13 
			 Wirral 3 12 15 
			  North West 77 464 541 
			 
			 Kingston Upon Hull, City of 2 7 9 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 4 41 45 
			 North East Lincolnshire 2 14 16 
			 North Lincolnshire 0 18 18 
			 North Yorkshire 3 89 92 
			 York 1 2 3 
			 Barnsley 0 20 20 
			 Doncaster 0 17 17 
			 Rotherham 1 23 24 
			 Sheffield 1 17 18 
			 Bradford 5 19 24 
			 Calderdale 0 14 14 
			 Kirklees 2 50 52 
			 Leeds 0 29 29 
			 Wakefield 3 34 37 
			  Yorkshire and The Humber 24 394 418 
			 
			 Former Derbyshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Derbyshire 8 120 128 
			 Derby 8 22 30 
			 Former Leicestershire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Leicestershire (post 1 April 1997) 1 45 46 
			 Leicester 0 13 13 
			 Rutland 0 5 5 
			 Lincolnshire 5 69 74 
			 Northamptonshire 9 64 73 
			 Former Nottinghamshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Nottinghamshire (post 1 April 1998) 2 70 72 
			 Nottingham 1 17 18 
			  East Midlands 34 425 459 
			 
			 Former Hereford and Worcester n/a n/a n/a 
			 Herefordshire 0 14 14 
			 Worcestershire 1 53 54 
			 Former Shropshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Shropshire (post 1 April 1998) 0 51 51 
			 Telford and Wrekin 1 17 18 
			 Former Staffordshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Staffordshire (post 1 April 1998) 5 83 88 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 6 11 17 
			 Warwickshire 7 48 55 
			 Birmingham 20 26 46 
			 Coventry 1 8 9 
			 Dudley 1 6 7 
			 Sandwell 0 12 12 
			 Solihull 0 10 10 
			 Walsall 8 11 19 
			 Wolverhampton 7 10 17 
			  West Midlands 57 360 417 
			 
			 Former Cambridgeshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Cambridgeshire (post 1 April 1998) 6 60 66 
			 Peterborough 1 6 7 
			 Norfolk 3 110 113 
			 Suffolk 1 99 100 
			 Former Bedfordshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Bedfordshire (post 1 April 1997) 7 75 82 
			 Luton 4 13 17 
			 Former Essex n/a n/a n/a 
			 Essex (post 1 April 1998) 1 138 139 
			 Southend-on-Sea 0 5 5 
			 Thurrock 0 12 12 
			 Hertfordshire 15 126 141 
			  East of England 38 644 682 
			 
			  London 63 221 284 
			 
			 Camden 1 7 8 
			 City of London 0 0 0 
			 Hackney 2 4 6 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 2 1 3 
			 Haringey 1 8 9 
			 Islington 0 2 2 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 3 1 4 
			 Lambeth 2 9 11 
			 Lewisham 1 8 9 
			 Newham 5 3 8 
			 Southwark 4 2 6 
			 Tower Hamlets 6 3 9 
			 Wandsworth 3 7 10 
			 Westminster 4 3 7 
			  Inner London 34 58 92 
			 
			 Barking and Dagenham 0 5 5 
			 Barnet 4 15 19 
			 Bexley 0 16 16 
			 Brent 3 4 7 
			 Bromley 0 15 15 
			 Croydon 6 17 23 
			 Ealing 4 7 11 
			 Enfield 0 1 1 
			 Greenwich 4 5 9 
			 Harrow 1 8 9 
			 Havering 0 13 13 
			 Hillingdon 0 10 10 
			 Hounslow 0 7 7 
			 Kingston upon Thames 1 7 8 
			 Merton 0 8 8 
			 Redbridge 0 4 4 
			 Richmond upon Thames 1 7 8 
			 Sutton 2 9 11 
			 Waltham Forest 3 5 8 
			  Outer London 29 163 192 
			 
			 Former Berkshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Bracknell Forest 0 9 9 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 4 15 19 
			 West Berkshire 2 26 28 
			 Reading 5 9 14 
			 Slough 4 4 8 
			 Wokingham 1 14 15 
			 Former Buckinghamshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Buckinghamshire (post 1 April 1997) 1 59 60 
			 Milton Keynes 2 35 37 
			 Former East Sussex n/a n/a n/a 
			 East Sussex (post 1 April 1997) 0 36 36 
			 Brighton and Hove 2 6 8 
			 Former Hampshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Hampshire (post 1 April 1997) 3 132 135 
			 Portsmouth 1 13 14 
			 Southampton 1 14 15 
			 Isle of Wight 0 15 15 
			 Former Kent n/a n/a n/a 
			 Kent (post 1 April 1998) 1 88 89 
			 Medway 0 29 29 
			 Oxfordshire 9 68 77 
			 Surrey 4 127 131 
			 West Sussex 4 53 57 
			  South East 44 752 796 
			 
			 Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 0 12 12 
			 Bristol, City of 9 16 25 
			 North Somerset 0 13 13 
			 South Gloucestershire 0 17 17 
			 Cornwall 2 36 38 
			 Former Devon n/a n/a n/a 
			 Devon (post 1 April 1998) 2 52 54 
			 Plymouth 1 4 5 
			 Torbay 0 4 4 
			 Former Dorset n/a n/a n/a 
			 Dorset (post 1 April 1997) 0 29 29 
			 Poole 0 3 3 
			 Bournemouth 0 1 1 
			 Gloucestershire 0 45 45 
			 Somerset 0 65 65 
			 Former Wiltshire n/a n/a n/a 
			 Wiltshire (post 1 April 1997) 0 50 50 
			 Swindon 0 12 12 
			  South West 14 359 373 
			 n/a = not applicable.  Source: School Census.

Teachers: Personal Social and Health Education

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many teachers of personal, social and health education have specific accreditation in relation to that subject.

Vernon Coaker: The available information on PSHE teachers and their qualifications comes from an occasional sample survey which collects data on teachers by subject taught and on their post A-level qualifications. The Secondary Schools Curriculum and Staffing Survey was last carried out in 2007, and found that very few secondary school teachers of PSHE in maintained schools in England held a qualification in the subject (less than 1 per cent.). The survey asks teachers to specify post A-level qualifications (degrees, masters, PGCEs, certificates of education, HNDs, post graduate certificates and diplomas) but does not collect details of teachers Continuing Professional Development or courses that do not result in a formal post A-level qualification.

Teachers: Training

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether he plans to allocate funding for the continuous professional development of teachers for the purposes of implementing the proposals in his Department's White Paper, Your child, your schools, our future.

Vernon Coaker: Schools already receive funding for continuing professional development for the whole school workforce, included within their delegated budgets. However, it is not ring-fenced because we believe school leaders are best placed to determine how funding should be allocated based on the needs of individual teachers, identified and agreed through the performance management process, and in the context of the school's own development and improvement priorities.
	Revenue funding per individual pupil has increased by £2,410 (83 per cent.) in real terms between 1997-98 and 2009-10, and therefore we expect that many schools will have increased their spending on CPD for teachers and other staff to reflect that.
	In 2010-11 schools funding will increase by 4.3 per cent. cash per pupil and 2.1 per cent. cash per pupil over 2011-13 at current levels of inflation, after taking account of rising pupil numbers.

Truancy

Lembit �pik: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of pupils had an attendance record of less than 90 per cent. at schools in England in each year since 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: In 2005/06, the School Census started to collect attendance data at individual pupil level from secondary schools only. This was extended to primary and special schools in 2006/07. The school level information collected before 2005/06 cannot be used to answer this question.
	The available information on the absence rates of pupils in primary, secondary and special schools in 2006/07 and 2007/08 is published as follows:
	 2006/07 -Table 3.2.
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000775/index.shtml
	 2007/08 -Table 3.2 .
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000832/index.shtml
	For these tables, less than 90 per cent. attendance will equate to more than 10 per cent. absence.
	Information for secondary schools only in 2005/06 is shown in the following table:
	
		
			  State-funded secondary schools( 1,2,3) : percentage of enrolments by their overall absence rates-2005/06 England 
			   Secondary schools( 1,2) 
			   Pupil enrolments in schools during 2005/06( 3)  
			  Overall absence rate:  Number  Percentage  Percentage of overall absence( 4) 
			 More than 10% 803,990 26.3 62.6 
			 Total 3,056,330 100.0 100.0 
			 (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) Includes maintained secondary schools, city technology colleges and academies (including all-through academies). (3) Number of pupil enrolments in schools from start of the school year up until 27 May 2006. Includes pupils on the school roll for at least one session who are aged between five and 15, excluding boarders. Some pupils may be counted more than once (if they moved schools during the school year or are registered in more than one school). (4) The number of sessions missed due to overall absence by pupils with more than 10 per cent. absence expressed as a percentage of the total number of sessions missed due to overall absence.  Note: Totals may not appear to equal the sum of the component parts because numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10. 
		
	
	Overall absence in 2007/08 stood at 6.29 per cent. the lowest on record, having fallen for eight of the last 10 years. On average 70,000 more pupils were in school each day in 2007/08 than would be the case if absence rates were still at the level of 1996/97.
	Persistent absence in secondary schools accounts for 27.6 per cent. of all overall absence. Schools and local authorities now have to target 'persistent absentees'. During 2008/09 the Department targeted, through National Strategies, 360 secondary schools, with high levels of persistent absence located within 42 local authorities. Collectively, these 360 schools reduced in 2008/09 their persistently absent pupils by 18 per cent. from the end of spring term 2008 to the end of spring term 2009. This shows our policies are working well and recognises the hard work taking place in schools and local authorities.